PERFECT. [An Unexpected Independent Follow-up to She]

So I was discussing my last post "She" with a friend [Shout-out to Miss Martins] [this post is quite old and has been in the drawer for a while] who felt my perception of perfect, was off. At first, I was still stubbornly believing my perspective of perfection was right, but later on, after her slightly [ever so slightly] convincing argument, I had a change in my understanding and realized that both our perspectives can be taken as perfect.. Relativistic Perfect and Absolute Perfect to be exact.

Going off Oxford dictionary's definitions of perfect:
1. Having all the required or desirable elements, qualities, or characteristics; as good as it is possible to be.

   1.1 Free from any flaw or defect in condition or quality; faultless.

   1.2 Precisely accurate; exact.

   1.3 Highly suitable for someone or something; exactly right.

We see slight, but very important variations from one definition to the next, for example, 1.3 sounds similar but not quite the same as the others [it sounds more of a "perfect for me" perfect unlike the others]. One may even go as far as to wish that another word were created for the exact definition, a similar issue I have with the word love [might have a separate post on this later]. With that said, I think I've come up with an unsatisfactory, but better than the current, way of defining perfect by separating the word into two types: Relativistic Perfect and Absolute Perfect.

In my last post "She", I put forward that no-one was perfect. I still believe this, no argument there, but that is Absolute Perfection; a perfection that everyone can agree upon.

Absolute Perfection is the perfection that Aristotle proposes in his thesis on the world of forms, this is the perfection by which no physical thing can ever posses. It is the perfect that we look for in all things, the perfect that is felt through infatuation or through the visceral and behavioral mind [Read quickly about this here]. This perfect is only perceived through a lack of knowledge and reflection. 
I must state now that I do not believe it to be a "bad" perfect before the wrong notion is taken away from this write up; it is the perfect that we should all try to attain in ourselves and in our creations, yet is unattainable.

Relativistic Perfection on the other hand, is more like the definition 1.3, "suitable for someone". This perfection can be attained, but is subjective. This is the perfect someone exclaims over their phone, laptop, or partner. It's the "perfect for me" perfect, it comes from extended time with the object or person. It's a contentment one feels with what they have. This as well is not an inherently good or bad perfect, it is just what it is. This perfect spawns from reflective thinking, the sort of thinking that has you feeling "this is the best thing I could ever have" knowing you are probably lying to yourself. In general, it's a perfect spawned from contentment.

Both perfects are probably crucial when thinking about ones life; and no one of them is better than the other, they're both simply different concepts.