Perfection Versus Optimality

Perfection Versus Optimality

Updated: Jan 9

Since perfection, most especially at all times, is realistically impossible, what is better to be strived for is optimality, because optimality is a form of perfection that binds itself to the circumstances of realism.

You may have noticed that I am using the word “optimal” a lot in my articles, and that is because optimality is much easier and preferable to reach over a state that does not abide itself to realism. Optimality, however, does just that — strives to become the best one can, with given resources and with given circumstances.

​Hence why we also don’t have to be the best at whatever we do. Being decent in whatever we do is a respectable, realistic compromise, making the notion of “being best” unnecessary to achieve in order to live a life of productivity and competence.

​We can try to be number one in whatever we do, but being number one is unnecessary in order to be in the general top of one or more activities. We can try again and again, but no number of attempts will guarantee us the number one position. A lot of attempts, however, will indeed increase the likelihood of being somewhere at the top.

It is therefore indeed fine to admit that we aren’t the best and don’t even have to be the best in order to be optimally-decent.


Featured Articles


© 2019 Tomasio A. Rubinshtein, Philosopher