Justice

[quatona]

"living without a concept of justice"

So you feel that you can´t approach this question without having/untilizing a concept of justice? Please expand on that idea so that I get a chance to understand it.

 

[prov1810]

So you feel that you can´t approach this question without having/untilizing a concept of justice?

A well-ordered society is one of the perennial concerns of justice. It's what we talk about when we talk about justice. And we can't do this without concepts of right and wrong.

 

[prov1810]

And this nugget:

"Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing, and rightdoing, there is a field. I will meet you there." (Rumi)

Intellectual apathy and moral indifference don't bring us a utopian field. What they do bring is institutional dysfunction and social disorder and radicalization.

 

[quatona]

A well-ordered society is one of the perennial concerns of justice.

This may be so, but it doesn´t mean
a. that you can´t approach a well-ordered society by means of other concepts,
b. that "justice"is the best concept to approach the task.

It's what we talk about when we talk about justice.

Who is "we" in this sentence?

 

[quatona]

And this nugget: Intellectual apathy and moral indifference don't bring us a utopian field. What they do bring is institutional dysfunction and social disorder and radicalization.

It seems like you misunderstood "this nugget".

 

[prov1810]

It seems like you misunderstood "this nugget".

^ Content-free post that illustrates my point.

When right and wrong are considered illusory or picayune, the issues themselves don't go away. Bullies don't go away. And the people who thought themselves superior to passionate, existentially serious commitments, who had nothing to think about beyond the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain, are the easiest to rule. They are weak. This is the end of a civilization.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Justice takes many forms, but I think that the essential idea is that a just person has an eye towards honoring what others deserve. Justice can be as simple as saying "thank you" when someone does something for you.

I regard justice as an important virtue.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[FireDragon76]

I'm confused. Justice is totally subjective yet we have an objective process to try to achieve an objective justice?

Getting ones standards of right and wrong from modern liberal democracies seems rather depraved, considering some of the abuses that have been sanctioned by them.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Getting ones standards of right and wrong from modern liberal democracies seems rather depraved, considering some of the abuses that have been sanctioned by them.

The standards of right and wrong advanced by liberal democracies are often used by the citizens to criticize the liberal democracies themselves when they are being inconsistent.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[quatona]

^ Content-free post that illustrates my point.

Yes, it had content, and, no, it didn´t illustrate your point.

The pattern so far: You keep quoting me, but then address assertions that I haven´t made. I don´t know how to productively deal with this fact.

When right and wrong are considered illusory or picayune, the issues themselves don't go away. Bullies don't go away. And the people who thought themselves superior to passionate, existentially serious commitments, who had nothing to think about beyond the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain, are the easiest to rule. They are weak. This is the end of a civilization.

I do understand that this is your premise.

 

[bhsmte]

I'm confused. Justice is totally subjective yet we have an objective process to try to achieve an objective justice?

Whether justice has been delivered in any particular case is subjective to each person and their own personal bias and or needs.

The objective process is in place, to assure, justice can ferret out personal needs and get at what is likely to be true, not just what is desired by some.

 

[prov1810]

The pattern so far: You keep quoting me, but then address assertions that I haven´t made. I don´t know how to productively deal with this fact.

OK. It seems that you are saying, in your posts and Rumi reference, that we can do without the concepts of right and wrong and justice. And to me it seems detrimental if we cannot say "that is wrong" or "that should not be" about certain things. We are speaking in ethical terms when we say these things. The alternative is nothing to think about, nothing to protect, and nothing to build.

 

[quatona]

OK. It seems that you are saying, in your posts and Rumi reference, that we can do without the concepts of right and wrong and justice.

Well, I said that I think it´s possible to do without the concept of justice.
Rumi´s quote doesn´t say anything about the necessity of concepts of right and wrong (or lack thereof).

And to me it seems detrimental if we cannot say "that is wrong" or "that should not be" about certain things.

And here´s where you address a statement that hasn´t been made.

We are speaking in ethical terms when we say these things. The alternative is nothing to think about, nothing to protect, and nothing to build.

No, the alternative to approach an issue by means of a particular concept isn´t "nothing", but to approach it by means of other concepts.
I do understand that you personally (and everyone whom you include in your "we") have a strong need to approach things the way you do. That however doesn´t mean there aren´t viable alternatives.

 

[prov1810]

viable alternatives

Such as?

And I'm using "we" because using "one" as a pronoun seems stilted. "We could say that" is another way of saying "it could be said that". I'm not speaking for a tribe.