Human perfectibility

Perfection may be seen as the actualizing of the highest human potential. Religious tradition sees perfectibility of human beings as realized in identification or union with the perfect in ultimate reality.

A number of different kinds of human perfection may be distinguished as follows:< [Technical perfection]

by which man becomes perfect by improving his ability to perform a task and through his perfect performance of that task. This raises the question as to whether it is sufficient to perfect one's self as a human being merely by perfecting one's ability in a task and performing it perfectly. The answer is normally that this needs to be accompanied by some other form of perfection.

[Obedientiary perfection]

by which man becomes perfect by absolute obedience to the will of some superior authority (possibly God or some elite) who is perfect and therefore guarantees the perfection of man through that obedience. The perfection of man's conduct when he obeys the authority then lies, however, not in his obedience as such but in the fact that his conduct reflects the perfection of that authority.

[Teleological perfection]

by which man becomes perfect through the attainment of some natural end in which it is his nature to find final satisfaction (which may be identified with happiness or well-being). Whereas technical perfection entirely depends on talent and skill, man can achieve this form of perfection as a gift, or by luck, rather than as a result of effort.

[Moral perfection]

by which man becomes perfect through becoming, in some absolute sense, a better person. This implies that all human potentialities actualized in the person by this process are in fact potentials for good. It has been suggested that criminality, for example, is not a potentiality capable of being actualized but rather a defect or imperfect actualization of a potentiality.

[Metaphysical perfection]

by which man becomes perfect or complete through reducing and eliminating his dependence for existence on anything else, since such dependence is an indication of his incompleteness. This requires that man stand aside from life and not allow himself to be influenced by anything which happens to him; that he become less finite and less temporal by freeing himself from all concern and uniting himself with some superior being. This removes final perfection beyond human aspiration and implies that no finite being could be absolutely perfect, although some exceptional individuals may be identified as such, particularly in certain religions.

[Aesthetic perfection]

by which man becomes perfect through the full and harmonious, orderly development of all his faculties, physical, emotional, intellectual and moral. Aesthetic perfection is related to technical perfection but implies the perfect performance of tasks in a flawless social context, with the latter taking on the attributes of metaphysical perfection, namely unity, immutability and self-sufficiency. A society which values unity, harmony and stability above all else may do so only at the cost of suppressing human freedom and creative experiment.

[Exemplary perfection]

by which man becomes perfect by conforming to an ideally perfect model of a human being or alternatively by becoming godlike (deiform perfection).

The Greeks established an ideal of metaphysical perfection and the notion that human beings could share some features of the perfection of a supreme being. They demonstrated that perfection involved knowledge, including a rational understanding of the universe, and that this knowledge could only be achieved by withdrawing from the world, although it was possibly achievable in an ideal society. They also attempted to set up a lower level of morality as a preliminary step on the ordinary citizen's path towards perfection.

The vedanta see human beings as imperfect in that they do not know their identity with the Absolute, Brahman, which is perfect. Because of this inability to perceive reality as it is, human actions are also imperfect. Such action or karma leads to the cycle of existence and reincarnation. Perfection is achieved with perfect realization that the Atman, individual soul, is one with the Brahman. Both Hindu and Buddhist traditions set down certain paths for perfection - the Hindu through [karma marga]

, or unattached action, through [jnana marga]

, wisdom through meditation, or through [bhakti marga]

, devotion; and the Buddhist through the the three stages of [sila]

(ethical conduct), [samadhi]

(concentration) and [prajna]

(wisdom). The first five perfections, or [paramitas]

, of Buddhism and Zen, which are of the mind, are said to lead to the quest of the Arhat for final perfection beyond human perfection.

The major sects of Christianity have been opposed to the view that man can in this life lead a flawless existence, promising perfection only in some future life to some or all, and maintaining that in this life only progress towards perfection could be achieved. Others, however, have sought complete perfection, whether by renunciation of the world, or by direct union with God, by an overwhelming conversion, by placing themselves entirely in God's hands, or by an exercise of will. According to St Augustine, full perfection can be achieved only through grace - the lowly estate of man compared with God, and original sin which makes it impossible for man even to will that perfection of which he is capable, make it impossible for man to achieve perfection on his own. Thomas Aquinas held that evangelical perfection could nevertheless be achieved by removal of all mortal sin and cultivation of the love of God. This quest for perfection was that of Christian mystics, with severe asceticism often used to subdue fleshly desires; perfection would be achieved through freedom from sin and union with God. John Wesley also held that perfection was possible, by grace and through faith which must be actively sought through following God's commandments.

In secular terms, following the Renaissance, hope for perfection was associated with the improvement of man's relationship with man rather than with God, in moral rather than metaphysical terms, and particularly in the notion of doing the maximum of good. Man could then be improved to any degree by the use of appropriate mechanisms such as education or behaviouralist procedures. The concern was whether such social action would be employed in the interest of freedom rather than in the interest of absolute authority.

History, as understood by Hegel, showed the gradual coming to self-consciousness of an absolute idea, sometimes identified with God, by means of dialectical processes. Marx showed that this dialectic worked through class-struggles which would finally result in a class-less, state-less, society. His view was that, under capitalism, man is alienated from his fellow-men and in consequence from his human essence. Private property alienates him, preventing him from working out of joy in his creative powers and his control over nature, thus denying himself in his work, developing no free physical and mental energy, mortifying his flesh and ruining his mind. Communism as the complete and conscious restoration of man to himself would free him from this alienation. As such it was the true resolution of the conflict between existence and essence, objectification and self-affirmation, freedom and necessity, individual and species.

Communism argues that following social revolution, the possibility of improvement is endless, provided that the bourgeois society is completely overthrown to eliminate the fundamental flaw in the civilized world due to which progress has dehumanized rather than humanized man. It is held that some form of antagonism or dialectic is essential to man's development, although not to his final condition.

Theories of natural evolution, following Darwin, suggested that the future perfection of man would continue as a result of the continuing process of the selection for survival of the fittest. In opposition, it is suggested that man is unique, particularly in his freedom and his ability to cooperate with the processes of evolution. Self-consciousness is an emergent quality, which suggests that some new and improved lifeform, some superhuman being, might yet evolve, with unforeseeable powers.

Teilhard de Chardin suggests that evolution proceeds towards the perfection of man in new forms of social organization which then make possible the ultimate union of man with God. The conflict between perfection within the religious framework and as a result of natural development is therefore eliminated.