Hello Mark.
 >> Mr. Rigor wrote to Mark Bloss about "Existence Exists"
 MR>> The idea that "we come closer to perfection" seems to presuppose
 MR>> that "perfection" exists.  If one does not already believe in the
 MR>> existence of "perfection", then one would (should?) presumably
 MR>> not make statements about "coming closer" to it. I know that
 MR>> gukynopt exists, because I come closer to gukynopt.
 MB>  How is it that one knows not that perfection is a "real thing"?
Lack of a coherent definition of "perfection" helps in this.
 MB> Cannot one build a wall precisely parallel to the direction of
 MB> gravity?
Any given wall will probably not be parallel with gravity.
 MB> Can one not precisely spell a word?  Can one misssspell a word
 MB> incorrectly?
Does "perfect" mean "correct" then?  Correct according to whom?
 MB> Is a perfect square not discernible?
What does "perfect" mean again?
 MB> Is a skewed square not obvious?
What does it mean for a square to be "skewed"?
 MB> Why bother using a square to prevent mistakes while making a dresser,
 MB> or to prevent a mishapen drawer? Why use a plumb-bob?  Why use a
 MB> level? Why measure _anything_?
To get "close enough".
 MB> if perfection is a fiction.  Why all the complex mathematics to
 MB> program a space-craft on its way to the moon?
To get "close enough".
 MB> Wouldn't chance offer better chances then, if it were not for
 MB> perfection?
If it were not for _what_?
Mr. Rigor
--- GoldED 2.50+
---------------