What is the objective? Balance or perfection?

For a moment lets consider balance and perfection as mathematical curves. One way to consider it.

The way life works, efficiency and perfection run on a scale of diminishing returns. The returns do pile up but in an ever diminishing fashion. Perfection is the maximisation of the area of the curve. 

On the other hand, balance is perhaps hitting the point where the objective function of two or more such curves can be met. Ideally before the diminishing returns begin to accelerate. There, you find more calm, tranquil being. Not perfect, not completely efficient, but perhaps good in many things.

Perfection has perhaps only one objective function to solve for. While life, and balance has many functions, and the objective is to find that balance which can maximise the area of many of those functions.

The other thing is that the energy spent to chase the curve to its full glory of perfection keeps increasing. As anyone who has tried to take something up from 80 to 100 would have felt, the unit of effort every point goes up. If life were only one thing, perhaps we could all call perfection the objective. But life is many things, and successful objective is one which maximises for balance in many.

In practical terms it means listen to Pareto and what he perhaps distilled in his 80/20. In practical terms, it implies you may not be perfect in anything, but good in many many things.

Life is a multiple function thing at every now. You can still clear off some nows and focus only on one thing and aim for momentary perfection, but for most nows, one perhaps aims for balance.