2013-01-11, 22:33 | Link #21 | |
:cool:
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Idaho
Age: 32
|
Quote:
Part of the reason why I say that, is because you have a lot of situations where people with bad socio-economic backgrounds who have committed repeated minor crimes and ended up in prison, shouldn't be in prison. A lot of people in those situations, especially those living in deprived neighborhoods where gangs and other small-time criminal organizations, commit those crimes because they either had no choice or they felt they had no choice. Like most things justice is simply a concept. It's an idea. Yes it's open to interpretation, but at the same time it has a collective definition. We "know" what justice is, because it exists. We have that concept and we know what the average person considers that to be. Equating it to a sort of karmic system is just me defining what the term is as we know it. Where it gets interpretive is when you apply it.
__________________
|
|
2013-01-12, 00:07 | Link #22 |
廉頗
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Massachusetts
Age: 34
|
I think every human society possesses a standard of justice and fairness, but the standards can vary widely and the importance of justice and fairness to a culture can also vary. I think a hunter gatherer tribe would usually place less emphasis on justice than a modern civilization, though the concept can be important to both groups. Ways of executing punishment and what acts deserve punishment can vary as well. Many societies also have a sense of fairness, but react to their conceptions of this term differently, and what type of treatment or privileges (if any) someone inherently deserves as part of a group.
If the universe itself has a conception of fairness and justice, I am certainly incapable of understanding it. I believe that both justice and fairness can influence a society greatly, but the standards a society holds as just do not always play out in reality. A strong example, in my mind, is the status or abilities of the ruling class being seen as unfair/unjust by a majority of a population, but there being no way of absolving the situation. I believe it's also quite possible, and seemingly the case based on some of the limited research I've perused, that intelligent animals that live socially can have their own conceptions of justice and fairness, on some level. |
2013-01-12, 06:37 | Link #23 | |||
Knight Errant
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 35
|
Quote:
Quote:
If a regime is based on injustice, it usually falls apart quite quickly. Which is why it can be a very dangerous thing when large parts of society disagree on fundamental ideas of justice/ethics because then no regime could ever be viewed as "just" by both, and so within one segment of society there'll always be the seeds of revolution. Quote:
|
|||
2013-01-12, 19:31 | Link #24 | |
Senior Member
Author
|
Quote:
Like many things, "justice" is a mixture of nature and nurture. In other words, it's part biological and part sociocultural.
__________________
|
|
2013-01-12, 19:43 | Link #25 | ||||
Romanticist
Join Date: Aug 2009
Age: 33
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||||
2013-01-12, 21:49 | Link #26 | |
Knight Errant
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 35
|
Quote:
You are correct in saying that the French Revolution occurred because the French system of government was no longer in step with how people (but also particularly the intelligentsia) viewed ideas of justice. Aristocratic privilege no longer made sense, and people felt it was unjust. The intelligentsia were a particularly important factor as they could lead such a movement. Peasant revolts had occurred earlier, but they always collapsed into anarchy, as they lacked the educated core to administrate the new regime. |
|
2013-01-18, 01:49 | Link #27 | |
Not Enough Sleep
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 48
|
Quote:
is 3 yrs Just and Fair?
__________________
|
|
2013-01-18, 06:49 | Link #29 | ||
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 43
|
Quote:
You seem to be asking the wrong questions. You are asking if Justice exists independent of human thought. But that assumes you think only physical atoms matter. Justice is not a substance, it is an idea. Thus it can't exist if no one believes in it. Justice is created because it benefits society. Because we humans are better off when we maintain justice. You might as well ask if "zero" exists. or if "A hole in the ground" exists. Something doesn't need to be able to be put on a plate to exist. The "Believe there is such a thing as justice" IS justice. They are equivalent. As for fairness? I think the old saying fits here; "you know something is fair when both sides believe they lost." Quote:
__________________
Last edited by Vallen Chaos Valiant; 2013-01-18 at 07:01. |
||
2013-01-18, 07:45 | Link #31 | |
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 43
|
Quote:
But as I mentioned, "fair" is by its very nature unpleasant. You can never "win" in a fair scenario. Fair is when everyone loses. Laws are created to try to generate fairness, flawed as they were. Because if you think absence of law is fair, you haven't been to a lawless land.
__________________
|
|
2013-01-18, 08:06 | Link #32 | |
I'm not a tumor
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: In the dreams of beautiful women
Age: 31
|
Quote:
If laws do not benefit the majority of the people in a democratic society i'd say by democracies very premise that those laws are unfair yet still just. |
|
2013-01-18, 13:17 | Link #35 | ||
Knight Errant
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 35
|
Quote:
While such societies can often live harmoniously for long periods, if some kind of dispute arises between two factions it can often lead to escalating and ultimately ... murderous consequences, as no one has defined a regular set of penalties, so people will keep seeking revenge against one another. But I disagree that the law is "unfair". It's the definition of fairness. Everyone gets what is due to them, and everyone is equal before it. I can't really think of any better definition then that for "fairness". Quote:
For instance, when two people trade fairly, everyone wins, as each person gets rid of something they didn't want, and obtains something they did. Fairness should mean that everyone is equally satisfied (or unsatisfied) with the outcome. |
||
2013-01-18, 14:28 | Link #36 |
Logician and Romantic
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Within my mind
Age: 43
|
How did you come to that conclusion from what I said?
So I guess you believe the number "Zero" is a lie too? After all, it is a symbol of literally nothing... I need to make it clear, only some things in this world are PHYSICAL. If you want to claim everything non-physical is a lie, then you might as well claim there is no such thing as a hole in the ground. Just because it is created by humans and require maintenance by humans to exist, doesn't mean it is a "lie". Justice is a CONCEPT. To say that concepts are lies is most bizarre. Lying implies deception; are you saying someone is being deceived? Who?
__________________
|
2013-01-18, 15:37 | Link #37 | |
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
Quote:
|
|
2013-01-18, 16:55 | Link #38 | |
I'm not a tumor
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: In the dreams of beautiful women
Age: 31
|
Quote:
Maybe this boils down to defining fairness? Of course each definition will differ depending on what derives from your philosophical/political foundation of thought. I believe in practical equitable outcomes...but I know that school of thought isn't too popular these days... |
|
2013-01-18, 17:22 | Link #39 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
|
Quote:
Like abortion ban is more of a burden on women than men, on poor than rich, on unhealthy than healthy. And then if you bring politics into this, some laws would seem even less fair because they were made with the "ulterior" motive to differentiate and then target specific group of people even though they seem to apply to everyone on the surface. Last edited by maplehurry; 2013-01-18 at 17:54. |
|
2013-01-18, 21:25 | Link #40 | |||
Knight Errant
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 35
|
Quote:
Of course, sore losers would not be satisfied if they lost, but then the law isn't built to cater to those sorts(thankfully). Quote:
Quote:
The Law could be unfair in specific cases, but in general it is fair, because by definition the law is the human sense of "fairness" codified. If the law was inherently unfair to it's core, no one would follow it, because the reason people consent to the law is because we think it's fair and just (and laws that are seen as unfair/unjust quickly get ignored by the public at large EG Drug Laws). |
|||
Tags |
justice, philosophy |
Thread Tools | |
|
|