CONSISTENTLY INCONSISTENT

WHILE OUR SYSTEMS REFLECT HUMANITY’S DRIVE TO IMPART ORDER, I AM NOT CONVINCED THAT PERFECTION IS THE ANSWER. PERFECTION, AS A CONCEPT, SEEMS UNNATURAL—AN IDEAL THAT FEELS RIGID AND UNREACHABLE. NATURE, ON THE OTHER HAND, IS NOT BEST DESCRIBED AS PERFECT. IT SIMPLY IS.

IN NATURE, THERE IS NEITHER ABSOLUTE ORDER NOR TOTAL CHAOS. INSTEAD, THERE EXISTS A KIND OF BALANCE—A STATE THAT DEFIES STRICT CATEGORISATION BUT EMBRACES A SUBTLE HARMONY. IT REMINDS ME OF IDEAS LIKE THE GOLDEN MEAN, THE DAO, OR OTHER PHILOSOPHIES THAT RECOGNISE THE FLUIDITY OF EXISTENCE. NATURE IS SELF-SUSTAINING AND EVER-EVOLVING, NOT BECAUSE IT IS PERFECT BUT BECAUSE IT EMBRACES IMPERFECTION AS PART OF THE WHOLE.

PERHAPS THIS IS WHAT WE OUGHT TO DISCERN AND EMBRACE: A NATURE THAT DEFIES OUR CRUDE SYSTEMS AND IDEALS OF PERFECTION, YET OFFERS SOMETHING FAR MORE ESSENTIAL. IT IS A STATE OF BEING THAT LIVES BETWEEN ORDER AND CHAOS—AN UNDERLYING BALANCE THAT GUIDES WITHOUT IMPOSED RIGIDITY.

IN OUR ATTEMPTS TO BUILD, CREATE, AND EVOLVE, PERHAPS WE SHOULD NOT STRIVE FOR PERFECTION BUT SEEK ALIGNMENT WITH THIS BALANCE—TO EXIST IN A WAY THAT IS NOT JUST SYSTEMATIC BUT NATURAL.