The divine purpose

[Amorphos]

The divine purpose

It is plausible in my mind anyway, that existence is literally infinity being expressed, then that this will always necessarily result in perfection* [or as near as it can possibly get in a transient world], or it would be attempting to reach that plateaux. In which case we are something of a product of that, our efforts to reach perfection are specifically relative to its efforts to be expressed perfectly [and be perfect], we succeed or fail accordingly. The trick is to know what infinity is up to and where it is trying to achieve a manner of perfection, then with contemporary thought become part of the process. Such is the manner of invention and discovery, and hence perfection.

I also feel there are general trends, for example we have reached the apex of many kinds of machines, developments and other inventions. Thus when there is a collection of such we reach a level of general perfection, after which we will move onto the next set. No matter what our politics or other desires, we will move with the flow, be moved by it or fail relatively.

*woot, how do I explain that.

For Buddhists they develop the connection to the divine [infinity] through meditation, equally I would propose that given the right mindset [i.e. an awareness of what is being cultivated, so that your mind is set to the right focus], cultivating any art form, skill or knowledgeable understanding to a high enough level, will produce the same effect.
Perhaps we could call this contemporary Taoism.

In conclusion I feel that advancement is the divine cause, and where religions, politics and philosophies fail to see it and go by it, they are to be despised by the adherents of the true faith [lols] ~ you get the picture.

[Lupu]

Define perfection.
If you said this to me on the street I would say "Why should I care?"

[Amorphos]

Define perfection.
If you said this to me on the street I would say "Why should I care?"

It’s the process of trying to achieve perfection, rather than perfection itself. i would consider it so that the infinite perfection is base, thus it is not to be found.

Why care? Succeed or fail, if you succeed you are agreeing with the principle in some way ~ unless the success is completely unethical, in which case you wouldn’t care anyway. I presume you are not like that, hence I think you care really.

[basics]

So what is the divine purpose? If we can understand that we are not here by chance, rather the good pleasure of God then divine purpose is explained by His word given to us directly or indirectly by Him. If we do not believe that then there is no divine anything.

So if we conclude that there is a divinity, even for the sake of the argument, then we must accept what the divine Person has to say is from but one source, Himself. And, accepting that, we also must look to where that source of knowledge comes. Is it by man or is it by God?

By man and one gets a hundred different religions, some knowledge and no satisfaction. By God one gets the beginning of all truth leading on to the ultimate of all truth assured that what that truth is will some day be complete. This is divine perfection.

[Helm]

By man and one gets a hundred different religions, some knowledge and no satisfaction. By God one gets the beginning of all truth leading on to the ultimate of all truth assured that what that truth is will some day be complete. This is divine perfection.

How about if God, man and everything else are all essentially one and the same thing?

[basics]

" How about if God, man and everything else are all essentially one and the same thing?"

Helm,

You know that you and I are not the same thing nor can we ever be as God is. The one absurdity that brings me close to the evolutionists thinking is that we can both agree that nothing is equal no matter how much we use the expression. I don't know you yet I can say that you most likely are better educated than me, could easily have more knowledge than me, yet not the experience that I have.

Why even God makes such separation the one from the other if only to prove or even disprove that we are equal in any shape or form. But that is man, not to be compared to God wherein we never even when saved reach those dizzy heights, but remain heirs only by adoption and not making.

I remember when dealing with a very autocratic accounts keeper at RAF Kinloss that whenever I handed in our bill to her it was never right and usually I had to take it away to be redone sometimes even then not to her liking. She insisted that the numerals were correct to the sixth or was it seventh decimal point before she would pass them for payment.

So when I say nothing is equal I include mathematics which to the layman the first or second decimal point is OK yet not to the Ministry of Defence's accounts buffs. I mean how does one pay for something to the seventh decimal point yet that was their insistence. I only mention this because I referred to nothing being equal and to put a little lightheartedness into what could be a long argument.

[Lupu]

It’s the process of trying to achieve perfection, rather than perfection itself. i would consider it so that the infinite perfection is base, thus it is not to be found.

Why care? Succeed or fail, if you succeed you are agreeing with the principle in some way ~ unless the success is completely unethical, in which case you wouldn’t care anyway. I presume you are not like that, hence I think you care really.

Of course I strive for perfection, or what to call it, but perfection is subjective, it's just natural, how is it the point of the universe? The reason I would as why I should care is because I don't get that kind of philosophy. Why spend your life asking why we live? I know one thing for sure; asking that question is not the ansver.

[Amorphos]

So what is the divine purpose? If we can understand that we are not here by chance, rather the good pleasure of God then divine purpose is explained by His word given to us directly or indirectly by Him. If we do not believe that then there is no divine anything.

You presume to much sir. A Buddhist would think of divinity as something different to what Christians do, and without a god.

Divinity doesn’t have to be personified.

Is it not so that by god we have a hundred different religions? He preached too many in the Christian tradition but also to Mohammad. Thus if we are to believe these people then god created the great schism which is cast across humanity.

--------------------------------------

Of course I strive for perfection, or what to call it, but perfection is subjective, it's just natural, how is it the point of the universe?

Good question! Perfection is objective where its results benefit mankind ~ as most inventions and discoveries have. It is the point of the universe because the universe is the manifest expression of infinity [if we accept that as our reality map], and all things would be trying to achieve their maximum potential. I would see this as; that which derives from the infinite would naturally attempt to emulate it, nature has no choice. Nature finds many kinds of perfection and evolution continually advances, all processes are relative to the infinite equation and will [and do] naturally advance. This is why we are here debating this.

The reason I would as why I should care is because I don't get that kind of philosophy. Why spend your life asking why we live? I know one thing for sure; asking that question is not the ansver.

Here you disappoint me, surely you cannot know that is the answer until you have asked the question? Equally is it not as important to know whay as to know how? With science we learn how things work, with philosophy we attempt to know why they do, both are valid requests.

------- ----------

principle; ‘a process will continue to its natural end and its own perfection’. that by which this is so, the infinite will naturally extend unto itself which has no limits, and by that all things are brought to fruition.

[basics]

" Is it not so that by god we have a hundred different religions? He preached too many in the Christian tradition but also to Mohammad. Thus if we are to believe these people then god created the great schism which is cast across humanity."

Quetzalcoatl,

No sir, I presume nothing but what is already written that there is but one God, one Faith, one Spirit and one Lord who says quite clearly that no man can come to Him except by Jesus Christ and none can come to Jesus Christ except the Father draws him.

God in justice may well have created schisms all over the place but these don't abrogate what has been written. It has been said that none can enter heaven unless they are born again, that is born of the Spirit of God into that one Faith of which there is no other. So regeneration is the only way back to the Creator and there is no religion on earth that can regenerate man.

Mohammed makes no provision for regeneration, no, nothing but work and striving so I wouldn't put too much store on what he has to say on the subject given also that he has no way round the Law by which his followers may even approach God. As for the rest they too will have to find the same way as that already written but alas according to God few ever do.

[Lupu]

Here you disappoint me, surely you cannot know that is the answer until you have asked the question? Equally is it not as important to know whay as to know how? With science we learn how things work, with philosophy we attempt to know why they do, both are valid requests.

I don't feel the need to know why things are like they are, a happy person won't ask such a question. Big philosophical questions are quests for a reason to live, for a reason to exist. I don't need this reason to live, only a goal.
For the discussion, I don't think that there's perfection, there's adaption because change is infinite. But thinking about life, improvement is needed, things that don't improve themselves will fail.

[basics]

" Of course I strive for perfection, or what to call it, but perfection is subjective, it's just natural, how is it the point of the universe? The reason I would as why I should care is because I don't get that kind of philosophy. Why spend your life asking why we live? I know one thing for sure; asking that question is not the ansver."

Lupu,

It is written that perfection comes by God and has to do with where you and I end up after death. You may seek by your own efforts but you will never by these attain it. Perfection cannot be natural since nature is fallen and doomed to die, why even science accepts this.

There are five words in ancient Hebrew that all mean perfection and in each case they point to this as an act of God. Where man is concerned this is called works and that never made anyone perfect. But you are not alone for many religions see works as a means to that end, the sad thing being it is a hard lesson to learn when it is too late. The Creator saves by faith not works.

[Amorphos]

Prove it.

Is self evident.

How is your perfection theory more right?

Because I can explain it somewhat, you cannot explain your god at all, you have no concept of what he is. If you have then lets hear it, and see how long it lasts.

Huh? I thought you were the one with all your important questions about the universe?

You asked why we cant talk to cockroaches and I answered.

--------------------------------

Why spend your life asking why we live? I know one thing for sure; asking that question is not the ansver."

Its fundamental, we all ask ourselves this in different ways during our lifetimes, any answers we can find will give our lives meaning and purpose, I don’t see how that is a bad thing. If we consider the current societal deconstruction we appear to be going through [‘broken Britain’ we call it over here], it seams as though societies without direction fall apart.

[Adrian]

Firstly my mind cant understand the concept of infinity or nothingness so that makes my view on time kinda skewed.

I don't agree that we have a set purpose but I agree that advancement and adaptability should be our long term goal and it is.


Humanity is for now the most capable life form and we can only retain that status if we continue our technological advancement there lies our strength our mind and our power to adapt our surroundings to us.

[Nietzsche]

The divine purpose

It is plausible in my mind anyway, that existence is literally infinity being expressed, then that this will always necessarily result in perfection* [or as near as it can possibly get in a transient world], or it would be attempting to reach that plateaux. In which case we are something of a product of that, our efforts to reach perfection are specifically relative to its efforts to be expressed perfectly [and be perfect], we succeed or fail accordingly. The trick is to know what infinity is up to and where it is trying to achieve a manner of perfection, then with contemporary thought become part of the process. Such is the manner of invention and discovery, and hence perfection.

I also feel there are general trends, for example we have reached the apex of many kinds of machines, developments and other inventions. Thus when there is a collection of such we reach a level of general perfection, after which we will move onto the next set. No matter what our politics or other desires, we will move with the flow, be moved by it or fail relatively.

*woot, how do I explain that.

For Buddhists they develop the connection to the divine [infinity] through meditation, equally I would propose that given the right mindset [i.e. an awareness of what is being cultivated, so that your mind is set to the right focus], cultivating any art form, skill or knowledgeable understanding to a high enough level, will produce the same effect.
Perhaps we could call this contemporary Taoism.

In conclusion I feel that advancement is the divine cause, and where religions, politics and philosophies fail to see it and go by it, they are to be despised by the adherents of the true faith [lols] ~ you get the picture.

Are you a Hegellian? This post sounds like one and several you have made before.

Firstly, I don't believe in the eschatological argument that humanity is moving toward any fixed point of perfection, or toward perfection at all. There is no indication that humanity is at all perfectible. Each foray into such thinking or social engineering achieves nothing but butchery.

Further, as there is no proof of any observable, conceivable, or foreseeable eschatological conclusion to the human race, it is just as likely the opposite will occur. We will immolate ourselves, or we will simple bumble in our perfectly human way for another 10 million years squabbling over this or that until our race or the universe winks out of existence.

Finally, I fail to see how meditation of any kind provides any insight into any of the ideas you profess. Meditation being self-reflection can only lead to circular reasoning. Did the idea ever dawn on you why Buddhist monks seclude themselves from the world? How is that conducive to achieving some end?

I think more appropriately that "enlightenment" evades a Buddhist in every way similar to a non-Buddhist. I think your assumption that religion and meditation holds some key to the mysteries of the universe is, in the end, egoism. While I applaud you desire to achieve maximum potential, I see no indication that meditation is the appropriate vehicle. Crawling inside one's head is the antithesis to reason in my mind. Sharing ideas in the cauldron of opposition is more appropriate. Even for a Hegellian.

[kesa82]

Firstly, I don't believe in the eschatological argument that humanity is moving toward any fixed point of perfection, or toward perfection at all. There is no indication that humanity is at all perfectible. Each foray into such thinking or social engineering achieves nothing but butchery.

I would say this.

Also I would say that given what we can observe in daily life it is reasonable to assume that we cannot know the divine purpose. We can not have but a limited dialogue with God. For example, can you explain yourself to a cockroach ? The fact that you cannot explain yourself does not indicate you are stupid, nor, for that matter, does it indicate that the cockroach is stupid. But for some reason we cannot talk to a cockroach. That seems an important fact in itself ; can we answer the important questions when we can't even answer a simple question like, " why can't we talk to cockroaches, or even to our dogs for that matter ? "
Somebody, I can't remember who, said that the Human mind abhors a vacuum, so it would prefer a bad explanation to no explanation at all. Atheists like to use that argument, but it so happens this Catholic likes to use it too. Perhaps the fact that you are not getting any phone calls from God signifies.....nothing. God doesn't talk to you because, well, you don't know why, and that's the point ; you don't know why.

To strive for perfection is, I suppose, a good goal. But people always seem to carry the point much too far. The trouble with bitter old maids seems always to be that they will not except that no man is perfect , a simple fact they would have to acknowledge if they did not patently ignore the fact that their girlfriends have plenty of dirty linen too. Pin your heart on any one human being and you will be disappointed and compromised. In and to that degree the followers of Joan of Arc are no luckier than the followers of Hitler.
I have heard that Mozart died a pauper, and that Van Gogh never sold a painting . Did that indicate to them in their own time that they were failures and their lives were pointless ? Did it seem so to others at the time ? The fact that history would later seem to vindicate them, to me, only seems to highlight and underline the question.
What is the purpose or meaning of the life of a retarded cripple, a creature that takes human form, but has less sense, and less utility, than a Sheepdog , and is it a tragedy, is it to be "fixed" somehow ?
Call me medieval, call me superstitious, call me backward and ignorant, but I don't think we can know this. And perhaps the measure of our character is to the degree that we except not knowing. We laud restraint in our diets , why not restraint in our ideologies ?
The danger, as someone pointed out , with Hegel, with unlimited free-will, The trouble with Shirley McClaine's " Out on a Limb " , ( and in my own writings of a different sort I indicate it as the basic trouble with democracy and republicanism, which invaribly addresses every "problem" with yet more reems of legislation, and makes of freedom a straitjacket ) is that if you slip on a banana peel and break your neck it must have been your own fault and /or the judgement of God. ----things we do not, in fact, know.
Perhaps the only real lesson I have drawn from 30 years study of history is the apparent absurdity of fate. A man is born Emperor of China, but in 1902, so he never even has any effective control over his own household, yet on the opposite side of the world a homeless man rises to be undisputed master of Germany.

[Jabberwock]

For Buddhists they develop the connection to the divine [infinity] through meditation, equally I would propose that given the right mindset [i.e. an awareness of what is being cultivated, so that your mind is set to the right focus], cultivating any art form, skill or knowledgeable understanding to a high enough level, will produce the same effect.
Perhaps we could call this contemporary Taoism.

What Buddhism are you speaking of? Theravada doesn't do that.

[Amorphos]

I don't think that there's perfection, there's adaption because change is infinite.

Is a cup a perfect cup, a sword a perfect sword, an engine a perfect engine. Maybe with the latter we shall continue to improve them, yet there is a pinnacle to all manner of engineering. Hence with perfection we don’t have to be talking about some vague ultimate ideal, but simply about the things mankind does ~ and the reasons we are ever spurned on to achieve them.

--------------------------

I don't agree that we have a set purpose but I agree that advancement and adaptability should be our long term goal and it is.

I suppose it depends on what we mean by ‘purpose’, we could say that the universe becoming a host of magnificent galaxies with wonderful planets like our earth, that is a purpose. The universe is designed to make such things come about, there is no doubt of that at least.

The question for a philosopher then is why, as that is the design then something is the architect!

Lets go through it step by step…

Some would say it is god, but then he needs an architect of his existence etc etc, but lets leave that to one side for now.

I prefer to go with the simplest explanation; that infinity is the base nature of things and the universe [and indeed the multiverse] is a product of that. This being so it then follows that everything being manifest of the infinite in origins, would have something of its unlimited nature within it.

Now consider what that means; if you have a process, then given an infinite duration of time, all processes would reach their conclusions. In fact you don’t even need any great amount of time for most processes to be played out. This means that all developed ideas and inventions will naturally find their pinnacle, all reasoning’s and perceptions can be fulfilled.

Perhaps in Einstein’s ‘all-time’, all things have been fulfilled, we then are like actors in the play, our free will is to be or not to be, that is the question.

-----------------------

Are you a Hegellian? This post sounds like one and several you have made before.

Did you mean this…
Hegelian
▸ adjective: of or relating to Hegel or his dialectic philosophy

Of course it will sound similar to post I made before, it is a continuing process of learning by the same person?

Firstly, I don't believe in the eschatological argument that humanity is moving toward any fixed point of perfection, or toward perfection at all. There is no indication that humanity is at all perfectible. Each foray into such thinking or social engineering achieves nothing but butchery.

I agree that mankind shouldn’t try to make perfection happen, it is not perfect so how can it achieve it. It has to be a natural process as it is if we don’t interfere with it.

Further, as there is no proof of any observable, conceivable, or foreseeable eschatological conclusion to the human race, it is just as likely the opposite will occur.

Good point. Why indeed does there have to be some manner of ultimate conclusion or any conclusion? In this theory no such thing is needed, our perfections are manifest En route and indeed once all processes are played out the purpose is fulfilled. Perhaps we will then fins some simple way of living and not be bothered by anything, the sun will eventually go supernova and we will end. One way or another all things will come to an end, so there is no need to attempt at end game scenarios.

Finally, I fail to see how meditation of any kind provides any insight into any of the ideas you profess. Meditation being self-reflection can only lead to circular reasoning.

If you read the op again you will notice that I was making a comparison between the different kinds of bliss attained. Meditation is not just about self reflection, one may contemplate any number of things, and rather than it being circular reasoning it is all about allowing trains of thought to reach their natural conclusion without divergence! This is not an easy thing to do by any means, and if we apply it to the mindset of the inventor, it can take a lifetime to find a process that once known is often simple. The mind is easily distracted and one must explore many avenues before finding the correct path to a discovery.

I think more appropriately that "enlightenment" evades a Buddhist in every way similar to a non-Buddhist.

If you don’t try you will not succeed, so I don’t see how not trying can bring a non Buddhist as near as a Buddhist. Its another discussion, but the base nature of existence is divinity [the infinite] and hence all things are connected to it, our minds given direction can reach it and even in Christianity have touched it many times. I am not a Buddhist btw.

I think your assumption that religion and meditation holds some key to the mysteries of the universe is, in the end, egoism.

If you feel we have no connection to divinity then you are right, my guess is that you don’t think that.

[Adrian]

Is a cup a perfect cup, a sword a perfect sword, an engine a perfect engine. Maybe with the latter we shall continue to improve them, yet there is a pinnacle to all manner of engineering. Hence with perfection we don’t have to be talking about some vague ultimate ideal, but simply about the things mankind does ~ and the reasons we are ever spurned on to achieve them.

--------------------------



I suppose it depends on what we mean by ‘purpose’, we could say that the universe becoming a host of magnificent galaxies with wonderful planets like our earth, that is a purpose. The universe is designed to make such things come about, there is no doubt of that at least.

The question for a philosopher then is why, as that is the design then something is the architect!

Lets go through it step by step…

Some would say it is god, but then he needs an architect of his existence etc etc, but lets leave that to one side for now.

I prefer to go with the simplest explanation; that infinity is the base nature of things and the universe [and indeed the multiverse] is a product of that. This being so it then follows that everything being manifest of the infinite in origins, would have something of its unlimited nature within it.

Now consider what that means; if you have a process, then given an infinite duration of time, all processes would reach their conclusions. In fact you don’t even need any great amount of time for most processes to be played out. This means that all developed ideas and inventions will naturally find their pinnacle, all reasoning’s and perceptions can be fulfilled.

Perhaps in Einstein’s ‘all-time’, all things have been fulfilled, we then are like actors in the play, our free will is to be or not to be, that is the question.

-----------------------



Did you mean this…
Hegelian
▸ adjective: of or relating to Hegel or his dialectic philosophy

Of course it will sound similar to post I made before, it is a continuing process of learning by the same person?



I agree that mankind shouldn’t try to make perfection happen, it is not perfect so how can it achieve it. It has to be a natural process as it is if we don’t interfere with it.



Good point. Why indeed does there have to be some manner of ultimate conclusion or any conclusion? In this theory no such thing is needed, our perfections are manifest En route and indeed once all processes are played out the purpose is fulfilled. Perhaps we will then fins some simple way of living and not be bothered by anything, the sun will eventually go supernova and we will end. One way or another all things will come to an end, so there is no need to attempt at end game scenarios.



If you read the op again you will notice that I was making a comparison between the different kinds of bliss attained. Meditation is not just about self reflection, one may contemplate any number of things, and rather than it being circular reasoning it is all about allowing trains of thought to reach their natural conclusion without divergence! This is not an easy thing to do by any means, and if we apply it to the mindset of the inventor, it can take a lifetime to find a process that once known is often simple. The mind is easily distracted and one must explore many avenues before finding the correct path to a discovery.



If you don’t try you will not succeed, so I don’t see how not trying can bring a non Buddhist as near as a Buddhist. Its another discussion, but the base nature of existence is divinity [the infinite] and hence all things are connected to it, our minds given direction can reach it and even in Christianity have touched it many times. I am not a Buddhist btw.



If you feel we have no connection to divinity then you are right, my guess is that you don’t think that.

I am as long as I exist the possibilities seem limitless.why look for limits why place them on us artificially ? we are here we evolved from ing stones to nukes and space travel.


Humanity doesn't have limits we have infinite potential I don't see the point in placing limits when we define the past and the future we define the universe what more can you ask for ?



We cant be defined doing so would limit us we simply are we are nature the universe we are part of it spawned from it so that means for me that we are the force of nature and by that we can never be limited.

[Amorphos]

kesa82

can you explain yourself to a cockroach ?

Humans have an intellect that has managed to understand everything it has come across thus so far, or at least we are in the process of. It is only a matter of time before we do understand the universe completely. You also presume there is a god that is beyond our comprehension, maybe you have difficulties in describing him because there is no way to describe something that doesn’t exist ~ at least in the way many people think of god. Because you are trying to define something outside of everything we know [because what we know doesn’t include your god!], you fail to describe him, hence you just think he is beyond our comprehension.

We cannot talk to our dogs and to cockroaches because they don’t have the facility for speech, so what is the important question we haven’t answered?

Perhaps the fact that you are not getting any phone calls from God signifies.....nothing. God doesn't talk to you because, well, you don't know why, and that's the point ; you don't know why.

Or that he doesn’t talk to anyone! How do you know my theory isn’t divinely inspired, you just have to presume it isn’t because it doesn’t fit with how you see things. Take a look at the histories, even religion has constantly sought advancement, the old monastic system was the very place of learning originally. Those great writers and illuminators were not divinely inspired?

Pin your heart on any one human being and you will be disappointed and compromised.

don’t and you will be also. You think a life of a bachelor is better than being married?

I have heard that Mozart died a pauper, and that Van Gogh never sold a painting . Did that indicate to them in their own time that they were failures and their lives were pointless ?

Good point, but you are measuring success in monetary terms, perhaps god/divinity in its wisdom took wealth from them knowing they would continue to produce great works. If they had become rich they would not have the same depth? This is not always true, but most likely, in fact the only way great riches can be inspirational is if they are rejected or not clung on to.

What is the purpose or meaning of the life of a retarded cripple, a creature that takes human form, but has less sense, and less utility, than a Sheepdog , and is it a tragedy, is it to be "fixed" somehow ?

There is probably no meaning for them, we can learn from adversity though. Steven hawkins seams to do ok. You are confusing a universal for something that acts in the specific, the universe is manifest as the stars and the earth with man upon it. This is a general thing, the overall process, the machine of evolution isn’t perfect but in nature anything that is dysfunctional is destroyed fairly rapidly, hence the Gaia machine has ways to rectify the flaws. That we humans don’t go by its laws is not really its problem.

perhaps the measure of our character is to the degree that we except not knowing. We laud restraint in our diets , why not restraint in our ideologies ?

Since when does ignorance/restraints improve anything? I would say the exact opposite, a restraint, especially just for the sake of it, is a limiting thing, and indeed the measure of our character is specifically to the degree we go beyond the given.

Perhaps the only real lesson I have drawn from 30 years study of history is the apparent absurdity of fate.

Not that it is a great mass of processes? …all of which we have ultimately grown by!

Adrian

why look for limits, why place them on us artificially?

Are you agreeing with the theory? It sounds like it to me, but it also sounds as if you think it is in some way limiting. I cannot for the life of me work out how?

[Lupu]

kesa82



Humans have an intellect that has managed to understand everything it has come across thus so far, or at least we are in the process of. It is only a matter of time before we do understand the universe completely. You also presume there is a god that is beyond our comprehension, maybe you have difficulties in describing him because there is no way to describe something that doesn’t exist ~ at least in the way many people think of god. Because you are trying to define something outside of everything we know [because what we know doesn’t include your god!], you fail to describe him, hence you just think he is beyond our comprehension.

Prove it How is your perfection theory more right?

We cannot talk to our dogs and to cockroaches because they don’t have the facility for speech, so what is the important question we haven’t answered?

Huh? I thought you were the one with all your important questions about the universe?