The Fruits of Imperfection
On toleration and criticism.
Beneath the nationalism and medal counts that seemed to dominate the Winter Olympic Games just ended lies a deeper lesson: the importance of imperfection.
Why do athletes compete at such a high level, sacrificing dearly — sometimes, as we have seen, even their lives? For many reasons, of course, but it’s often said they are “striving for perfection.” This can’t literally be true.
In some cases it’s hard even to imagine what this could mean. What is the perfect downhill time or the perfect hockey game? Here, you’re just trying to do better than your previous time or to beat the other guy. More important, even in those instances where it might be conceivable to envision perfection, that vision will change as we learn more about the world and what it’s possible to do in it. Such a vision could never be “perfect” because perfection rules out the possibility of improvement, and change would only diminish it. In this sense, perfection is essentially static.
Athletes and the rest of us are really just trying to do the best we can under the circumstances. In a world of uncertainty and change that’s the most we can hope to do – better, not perfect. At the same time it’s the very uncertainty and imperfection of the world that makes improvement (and decline) possible. In this sense, imperfection is essentially dynamic.
There are several directions one could go with this idea. Here, I would like to relate it to political philosophy. (I’m not a political philosopher, however, so I hope those of you who are will forgive the trespass.)
Tolerance and Criticism
The belief that perfection is reachable in this world can be extremely dangerous. That’s because striving for perfection seems to go hand in hand with extreme intolerance. Sometimes – as when an athlete, scientist, or artist devotes herself to “perfecting” her skills – the results of not tolerating less than total effort may be beautiful, despite all the frustration and torment it takes to get there. But when intolerance leads to torment inflicted on others, in an effort to achieve a particular vision of perfection, the result is ugly and destructive.
Since we and the rest of the world are imperfect, we and the rest of the world make mistakes – all the time. We can beat ourselves (and others) up over them, but if we want to progress — if we are to take the chances necessary to improve our situations — then we have to be okay with the unexpected and with error. Tolerance, and its close relative trust (and possibly forgiveness, but I wont’ go there right now), are indispensable for social and economic flourishing.
Does this mean that we have to tolerate everything? No. Progress — correcting our mistakes and improving our situations — also requires criticism. Tolerance without criticism is something like indifference, and that’s never a constructive attitude. To adjust to or anticipate change, at both the individual and social levels, involves using our reason to analyze what we have done and to question where we are going. We look at the mistakes we’ve made in a highly critical fashion so that we avoid making them again. Actually, we have to first realize that we have indeed made a mistake, which may be the hardest part. And because it’s hard to do any of this ourselves, it’s important that we are subject to the criticism of others, just as we criticize them. Criticize and be criticized! Competition and the threat of competition in sports, science, commerce, and the arts is an expression of this kind of criticism, all occasioned by imperfection.
At the same time, to avoid violent conflict, competition requires tolerance.
Tolerance and criticism are at the very heart of a free society. They are radical: They “go to the root” of the matter – radical tolerance, radical criticism. But, again, you need both. Tolerance without criticism is insipid; criticism without tolerance is, well, intolerable.
Conan and the Stones
These twin virtues of a free society are the fruits of the inevitable imperfections in human beings and their relations with other human beings. Of course, I’m not arguing that we should strive for imperfection. For one thing, that would be a waste of time because we’re already pretty imperfect. For another, I don’t think it’s really possible to try to be imperfect, any more than we can make a mistake on purpose (because if we do it on purpose it’s not a mistake).
But I think appreciating the profound imperfections of life is something that helped Conan O’Brien cope with his disappointment at being ousted from The Tonight Show after only seven months in his dream job. On his last night as host he said, without bitterness or cynicism, “Nobody in life gets exactly what they thought they were going to get.” This is reminiscent of the Rolling Stones’ song “You Can’t Always Get What You Want.”
Conan and the Stones understand that life is imperfect. Perhaps it makes them wise.











Comment by Wilson on 9 March 2010:
Mr. Ikeda, on Feb 16, you wrote
http://www.thefreemanonline.org/headline/nothing-lasts/
and I commented:
“…every once in a while, I read something like your post that resonates with me on many levels. My intuition tells me that there is a significant truth in applying wabi-sabi to socio-economic events and actions. Thank you for this thought-provoking insight. I look forward to reading more from you, for I am certainly not finished, not perfect, especially when it comes to economics.”
Today’s entry is equally insightful and, as you ended your post, wise. Thank you.
Comment by sandy Ikeda on 9 March 2010:
Thank you for your kind words in both of your comments, and I’m very pleased that you found the articles insightful.
Pingback by You Can’t Always Get What You Want | The Freeman | Ideas On Liberty on 9 March 2010:
[...] Check it out here. [...]
Comment by Jeff on 9 March 2010:
I am glad you avoided the D word. Deserve … all too often today you hear people say they derserved something and all too often you find they have done little or nothing to “earn” what they think they deserve …
good post, short and to the point … and obviously your opinion and not just re-cycled quotes from “experts” who happen to be lifelong writers …
Comment by Gus S. Calabrese on 9 March 2010:
Very nice. I will be sharing this with my philosophy students.
Doctor Joanne yamaguchi
Comment by Jacob Steelman on 9 March 2010:
Having been a former athlete I take exception to your article. Athletes do try to obtain perfection in the execution of their sport. That we do not attain it does not stop the pursuit. In my professional career I try to attain perfection. That I do not attain it does not stop the pursuit. Athletes at an event compete in a somewhat perfect environment unlike in the interventionist environment in which the vast majority of us work which makes achieving perfection extremely difficult if not impossible. If one does not strive for perfection in sport or work then the mediocre becomes the acceptable norm. The second rater as Any Rand would say.
Comment by Daniel Shapiro on 10 March 2010:
What a refreshing, enlightening, and inspiring essay! Thank-you Sandy Ikeda!
I would just add that I’ve come to believe that each individual’s life is ultimately an experiment in the pursuit of happiness where happiness is subjective and has no end (except at death). So we live and learn and perhaps leave a positive legacy of children and knowledge for our descendants to build upon.
As Mr. Steelman points out above, the statist’s want to intervene and tout their seductive “public good” fallacy. Only I can decide what is good for me – come what may. Can mankind grow-up and stop relying on parental surrogates in Washington DC and elsewhere, or will we remain little children shielded from reality and prevented from living and learning? Who want’s to be the sacrificial and imprisoned human guinea pig in some bureaucrat’s absurd utopian social experiment in “public good”.
The beauty of capitalism and the market is that in this relational structure we can discover where our respective “goods” intersect peacefully by accord and truly choose, as individuals, the greater good in our pursuit of happiness – come what may. Perhaps this is the rational basis of a dynamic man-made structure of durable freedom which perfectly fits mankind’s fallible, non-omniscient, and volitional nature.
Pingback by links for 2010-03-11 « Marty Andrade on 11 March 2010:
[...] The Fruits of Imperfection | The Freeman | Ideas On Liberty Quote:"Tolerance and criticism are at the very heart of a free society. They are radical: They “go to the root” of the matter – radical tolerance, radical criticism. But, again, you need both. Tolerance without criticism is insipid; criticism without tolerance is, well, intolerable." [...]
Trackback by stop spam plugin on 7 February 2012:
Stop Spam – WordPress plugin…
[...]please visit the site we follow, as it represents our picks from the most flexible wordpress plugin that stops spam.[...]……