IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 25th January 2021, 08:23 AM   #41
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,627
Originally Posted by Tommok View Post
Punishment is intended to keep those and other people from doing the same thing in the future, and the open "threat" with it is what is supposed to keep those acts from happening in the first place. This system is (more or less) beneficial for the well-being of a group of people, i.e. a society.
Deterrence isn't justice, it's pragmatism.

Quote:
Revenge on the other hand as motivation for punishment is not so good. In order for your society to work well, you should keep the idea of acting out of revenge in general to a minimum, as this doesn't contribute to the well-being of your group. Things tend to work better if people understand this and therefore try to direct their reactions to their emotions accordingly.
People want revenge. People need to feel like there's been retribution. People like deterrence, but they need to believe that if someone is not deterred, at least they get what's coming to them.

A justice system, first and foremost, should ensure that retribution is being meted out in a dispassionate, even-handed, and commensurate way. That punishments are imposed fairly, and that punishments fit the crime. A society can survive even if crime is not entirely (or even greatly) deterred. A society cannot survive if its citizens don't believe that criminals can fairly get what they deserve.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th January 2021, 08:24 AM   #42
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,627
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
If the closest we can get to "justice" is subjecting people to legal technicalities then I repeat, it's a pity.
It's only a pity if we can get any closer to the ideal.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th January 2021, 08:45 AM   #43
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,319
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Although I can see possibilities of achieving justice in some situations I think there are many where it will elude us. I will give you an example of such:

I colleague of mine some years ago, told a gathering at the office, of an incident involving his wife's less than astute driving.

As she was rounding a corner, a tray of cakes she had on the seat next to her, obeyed dynamic law and moved to the edge of the seat. The woman reacted to save the cakes and lost control of the car. The car mounted the curb and smashed into the fence of a property.

There was much laughter from the gathering. Being all male, some no doubt saw some reinforcement of their prejudice, that women drivers were lacking in ability. The damage to the fence was paid for by our colleague, and justice was done.

Now imagine if someone had been on the footpath. Someone who was killed or injured as a result of this misadventure. How would justice look in that instance?

Put yourself in the position of a loved one of the person killed by such carelessness. If it was your wife or child, what would come closest to making things right? And donít play the part of the uber-rational person here, put yourself in the mind of the average person.

I think the average person wants, at the end of the day, revenge. Most people arenít going to hunt the driver down and kill them but they do want the justice system to punish them. A few defensive driving classes to make them better, more careful drivers isnít going to cut it.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th January 2021, 03:37 PM   #44
jrhowell
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tampa Bay, Florida
Posts: 714
Originally Posted by Tommok View Post
Punishment is intended to keep those and other people from doing the same thing in the future, and the open "threat" with it is what is supposed to keep those acts from happening in the first place. This system is (more or less) beneficial for the well-being of a group of people, i.e. a society.

Revenge on the other hand as motivation for punishment is not so good. In order for your society to work well, you should keep the idea of acting out of revenge in general to a minimum, as this doesn't contribute to the well-being of your group. Things tend to work better if people understand this and therefore try to direct their reactions to their emotions accordingly.
Before the creation of formal justice systems the fear of revenge was a big part of keeping people in line. I believe that it is a fundamental part of human nature. It is hard to move beyond that.
jrhowell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th January 2021, 03:50 PM   #45
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,689
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Put yourself in the position of a loved one of the person killed by such carelessness. If it was your wife or child, what would come closest to making things right? And don’t play the part of the uber-rational person here, put yourself in the mind of the average person.

I think the average person wants, at the end of the day, revenge. Most people aren’t going to hunt the driver down and kill them but they do want the justice system to punish them. A few defensive driving classes to make them better, more careful drivers isn’t going to cut it.

I would be interesting to conduct a survey of people, who were bereaved as the result of another's actions. Some of those interviewed had the satisfaction, of seeing the perpetrator punished for their actions, and some not. If you could really get into the heads of those bereaved, I wonder what you would find? The former found closure and able to go on with a sense of fulfilment, and the latter not? I sincerely think no.

The desire for revenge is barbarism and we should try our best to nullify it. The desire for revenge, perhaps, is that which drives the people of the USA to an alarming degree. So incarceration rates are twice as high as in any other country, the death penalty retained, and correctional efforts a joke. Recidivism is a given. Some Scandinavian countries are the opposite.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.

Last edited by Thor 2; 25th January 2021 at 03:51 PM.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th January 2021, 05:54 PM   #46
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31į57'S 115į57'E
Posts: 17,169
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
It's only a pity if we can get any closer to the ideal.
It'sa pity if we can't get any closer to the ideal. More so if there is a better model but its implementation is thwarted by the legal system.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th January 2021, 08:10 PM   #47
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,627
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
It'sa pity if we can't get any closer to the ideal. More so if there is a better model but its implementation is thwarted by the legal system.
I don't see why it's sad that we're getting as close to the ideal as possible. If we could get closer but don't, that would be sad.

Do you think there is a better model? If so, what is it?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th January 2021, 11:07 PM   #48
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,319
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
I would be interesting to conduct a survey of people, who were bereaved as the result of another's actions. Some of those interviewed had the satisfaction, of seeing the perpetrator punished for their actions, and some not. If you could really get into the heads of those bereaved, I wonder what you would find? The former found closure and able to go on with a sense of fulfilment, and the latter not? I sincerely think no.

The desire for revenge is barbarism and we should try our best to nullify it. The desire for revenge, perhaps, is that which drives the people of the USA to an alarming degree. So incarceration rates are twice as high as in any other country, the death penalty retained, and correctional efforts a joke. Recidivism is a given. Some Scandinavian countries are the opposite.

Well, different cultures have different ways of thinking. I often think of the Asian countries as being particularly harsh. The Arab countries too. OTOH, for certain heinous crimes, the USA can be too lenient and for other more petty crimes, too harsh (and, of course, too much depends on oneís socioeconomic status and race). Scandinavian countries are much too lenient, in my view. When someone like Anders Breivik is sentenced to 10 years and can be let out if deemed no longer a danger, I think thatís a problem. Iím not a huge death penalty proponent but I do believe there are some crimes where itís warranted. At the very least, murder on the scale committed by Breivik deserves nothing less than life in prison. Those kids he murdered ... their lives counted for something. Their parents will never get them back. What kind of justice -in the sense of making things right- would it be if he gets to live a free life after taking the life of so many others? If he were ever released, I think it would even piss off quite a few Norwegians.

Even so, I think most people are satisfied that the Justice system works, for the most part. As ďbarbaricĒ as you might think attitudes around crime and punishment are in the US, consider OJ Simpson. Most of us think he did it and the justice system failed miserably, but he is able to live relatively freely (if he hadnít have messed up again) after his infamous exoneration. I donít know, if I were the family of the victims, that I would have such restraint, but society as a whole has basically shrugged its shoulders and said, ďoh well.Ē
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th January 2021, 11:29 PM   #49
Hlafordlaes
Disorder of Kilopi
 
Hlafordlaes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: State of Flux
Posts: 14,963
Fair is giving me a grape to reward my cooperation just like you gave the monkey in the cage next to me. **** cucumbers!
- Cap Puchino
__________________
Driftwood on an empty shore of the sea of meaninglessness. Irrelevant, weightless, inconsequential moment of existential hubris on the fast track to oblivion.
His real name is Count Douchenozzle von Stenchfahrter und Lichtendicks. - shemp
Hlafordlaes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th January 2021, 06:29 AM   #50
Tommok
Scholar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 65
Originally Posted by jrhowell View Post
Before the creation of formal justice systems the fear of revenge was a big part of keeping people in line. I believe that it is a fundamental part of human nature. It is hard to move beyond that.
Well, it's the fear of punishment rather than revenge that should keep people in line today. Revenge, and acting on it, should not be the basis of our judicial system at all.

Actually different countries have different approaches here. In Germany, for example, the courts keep pointing out that no harmed person has any say in the determination of the punishment of the bad guy. They always appear as witnesses, never as prosecuting agents. Of course, civil compensation may be required, but the punishment is never intended to work in the interest of the injured party, but rather in the interest of society as a whole.

I understand that other countries have different approaches, which may serve to justify atrocities like capital punishment. However I don't think society is best served by that approach.
Tommok is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th January 2021, 01:45 PM   #51
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,319
Originally Posted by Tommok View Post
Well, it's the fear of punishment rather than revenge that should keep people in line today. Revenge, and acting on it, should not be the basis of our judicial system at all.

Actually different countries have different approaches here. In Germany, for example, the courts keep pointing out that no harmed person has any say in the determination of the punishment of the bad guy. They always appear as witnesses, never as prosecuting agents. Of course, civil compensation may be required, but the punishment is never intended to work in the interest of the injured party, but rather in the interest of society as a whole.

I understand that other countries have different approaches, which may serve to justify atrocities like capital punishment. However I don't think society is best served by that approach.

Itís no different in the US. Here we allow victims and their families to testify at sentencing, for example, but their testimony might have some bearing on the sentence but in no way is the sole determinant.

Anyway, I think there may be some confusion as to exactly what Iím saying. Yes, retribution and the desire for personal revenge is a fundamental part of human psychology but in the modern world, this desire has been sublimated by the Justice System. When I say ďsublimatedĒ I mean it in the psychological sense: a basic instinct that is made socially unacceptable and then diverted into an socially acceptable activity.

So most of us suppress our instincts and let the State act in our stead because we donít want to be punished by the State ourselves.

Absent an effective Justice System, we would not have an outlet for our desire for retribution and might seek it out personally. IOW, the Justice System serves as an outlet for our retributive desires, turning them into something more positive for the society as a whole. Thatís the base of what Justice is all about.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th January 2021, 02:06 PM   #52
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,627
My view of this is that a society tends to go off the rails when everyone gets to apply their own personal retribution. And a society tends to go off the rails when it doesn't seem like there's any real retribution being applied by anybody - or at least not being applied equally to everybody. The reasonable middle ground, that keeps societies relatively peaceful and productive, is a consensus approach to retribution through a relatively dispassionate process. It doesn't privilege any one victim's desire for revenge. It doesn't necessarily satisfy every citizen's desire for just retribution in every case. But it works better, almost all the time, than the more extreme alternatives.

And yes, I do think justice is about retribution, and should be.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th January 2021, 02:09 PM   #53
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,689
Originally Posted by Tommok View Post
Well, it's the fear of punishment rather than revenge that should keep people in line today. Revenge, and acting on it, should not be the basis of our judicial system at all.

Actually different countries have different approaches here. In Germany, for example, the courts keep pointing out that no harmed person has any say in the determination of the punishment of the bad guy. They always appear as witnesses, never as prosecuting agents. Of course, civil compensation may be required, but the punishment is never intended to work in the interest of the injured party, but rather in the interest of society as a whole.

I understand that other countries have different approaches, which may serve to justify atrocities like capital punishment. However I don't think society is best served by that approach.

You seem to have a similar take on this to myself Tommok.

Capital Punishment is an atrocity as you say and most of the civilised world have come to this realisation.

Punishment in general need not be the only motive in determining sentences. It may help society by discouraging transgression and by keeping someone, who is a threat to others, locked up. Perhaps the latter should be given more consideration. We often hear of a villain being released when still a threat, and lo and behold, they go and injure or kill again.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th January 2021, 11:41 AM   #54
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 22,944
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
My view of this is that a society tends to go off the rails when everyone gets to apply their own personal retribution. And a society tends to go off the rails when it doesn't seem like there's any real retribution being applied by anybody - or at least not being applied equally to everybody. The reasonable middle ground, that keeps societies relatively peaceful and productive, is a consensus approach to retribution through a relatively dispassionate process. It doesn't privilege any one victim's desire for revenge. It doesn't necessarily satisfy every citizen's desire for just retribution in every case. But it works better, almost all the time, than the more extreme alternatives.
I think that is the framework most of us feel like we are working within. Not wanting to tear down the system, but trying to show problems where equality is not evident.

Quote:
And yes, I do think justice is about retribution, and should be.
Maybe it is just a reframing of retribution, but I feel like there is a strong desire for people to be "held accountable" for their actions. Financial accountability is pretty simple, but non-financial accountability is much harder.

I remember hearing a podcast years ago where researchers found that when doctor's admitted to their mistakes the medical malpractice plaintiff's were less aggressive and it typically saved the doctors and their insurers money. This is quite contrary to all legal advice in the US relating to liability, but apparently some hospitals took this approach and saw positive financial outcomes as a result. Also, the plaintiff's were more satisfied. IIRC, the sentiment was along the lines of: The money will never correct what I lost, but hearing the doctor admit to their error gave some sense of closure.

Obviously, that is typically outside of the criminal realm, but I feel like there is a parallel where the victims of a crime want more than just punishment, they want some understanding and acknowledgment of wrongdoing from the criminal. Not that this is the whole thing, but that it is an important part of the thing.

I guess this is most often portrayed as the parole board looking for contrition before granting parole. Which always looks stupid, whether it is an Ocean's movie or The Shawshank Redemption. That our legal system further punishes those who admit to any culpability is a bit silly and just makes it harder for victims and their families to reach for this sort retribution. This accountability?
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th January 2021, 03:57 PM   #55
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,689
I read that involved sentencing hearings are becoming more common. These can involve victim impact statements:

Quote:
Victim Impact Statements

With sentences increasingly reflecting the impact of crimes on victimsí lives, a crime victim might seek assistance from a friend or counselor when writing an impact statement. Statements may touch on the physical, emotional, and financial effects of crimes. For example, how did a crime change the victimís daily life or general lifestyle? How did the crime affect relationships with family members and friends? What medical or psychological treatment has a crime necessitated?
I find this disturbing because it should be the severity of the crime we should be focusing on, not the severity of the impact.

If we look at the example I gave above where the woman crashed into the fence while trying to save her cakes.

In the hypothetical situation where she killed someone as a result of her poor driving, she could be faced with a charge of manslaughter and find herself in jail, although the crime would not have been any more severe, than if she had just smashed the fence. If she was a decent person the knowledge that she had killed someone would be significant punishment itself.

Moving into the non hypothetical, there are many who have been severely punished, when they have hurt or injured others, whilst "driving under the influence". If they are pulled over by the cops and found to be committing this same crime, they are just fined and may lose points on their licence.

In countries like Sweden they have a much better perspective. Get caught drink driving and you go straight into the slammer.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th January 2021, 04:04 PM   #56
ServiceSoon
Graduate Poster
 
ServiceSoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,622
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
So what's your definition of justice? Or do you not have one because society hasn't told you what to think?
I provided the definition of justice as it exist in practice/reality. I think your question is, what would I like the definition of justice to be. I'd go with, Justice is the failure for all interested parties to achieve their individual/collective moral/ethical expectations at the culmination of their dealings.

Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Justice means to make things right.

In a society, a justice system is essential. You can’t have individuals getting justice for themselves -that’s just anarchy. No, you need a neutral party to look at each case and decide 1)If there was a wrong that needs to be righted and 2)how best to make that wrong right.

A justice system sublimates the base human instinct for revenge.
Isn't that how our system currently functions? The most meaningful addition to your depiction of justice is that we have written laws so that the neutral parties (Judges) know what corrective action is customary. I recently learned that Judges can do whatever they want, they do NOT have to follow what the law describes as appropriate.

Originally Posted by p0lka View Post
Justice is when the aggrieved feel ok with the balance of the result.
If that is how our justice system was designed, it would result in an unequal amount of justice being applied on the aggregate. Here is a simple example of that occurring:

Jill punches Albert. Albert demands an apology. Jill apologizes.

John punches Phil. Phil demands $500 as payment. John pays Phil.

According to your definition, Justice was served in both scenarios, however, equality of outcome doesn't not exist.

Last edited by ServiceSoon; 27th January 2021 at 04:55 PM.
ServiceSoon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2021, 09:02 AM   #57
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,627
Originally Posted by ServiceSoon View Post
I'd go with, Justice is the failure for all interested parties to achieve their individual/collective moral/ethical expectations at the culmination of their dealings.
I don't understand what this means. At all.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2021, 09:02 AM   #58
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,627
I invite anyone who thinks that justice isn't about retribution to skim the Gamestop stock manipulation threads.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2021, 10:28 AM   #59
Myriad
The Clarity Is Devastating
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 17,626
Justice is frozen water in its purest form.
__________________
A zÝmbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2021, 11:08 AM   #60
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,627
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
Justice is frozen water in its purest form.
LOL.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2021, 02:10 PM   #61
HoverBoarder
Graduate Poster
 
HoverBoarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,621
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
People have disagreed over what justice is for millenia. Or maybe longer.

Some researchers have argued that a sense of justice is a kind of heuristic that humans (and other primates) have evolved to maintain group cohesion.

But does that map onto society as a whole?

Can there be a truly coherent system of justice?

What should the state's role in administering justice be?

Do theories of justice stemming from retribution, protection of society, deterrence or rehabilitation have the strongest claim as an organizing principle of justice systems around the world?

Please argue your pants off...
Originally Posted by ServiceSoon View Post
A definitive definition of Justice is fleeting because it has been changed throughout history. This implies that Justice is a social construct; that means society decides what its definition should mean.

There have been examples that have already been posted in this thread that engender this as true. Another example is the contrasting ideas of Equality Under the Law with Equality of Outcome. Both have usefulness in making value judgments.
This is exactly right. Specifically, the culminative feeling of justice from the people living in a society is a direct reflection on the effectiveness, fairness, and viability of that society at a given time and place. In many ways the Justice of a specific society is an indicator of that Societies health and viability. The laws, rules, and norms, reflect the social contract of that society. If enough people agree to follow those rules, than there will be a viable society as long as other economic, military, or environmental factors do not prevent its existence. The collective determination of justice in Society represents a public's desire to continue or null that societies social contract. If enough people decide that their society is unjust, that could be a good indication that the Society will face an upheaval.

The important thing to remember is that Justice is an idea, not an action. You can incarcerate someone under a societies 'Justice System,' but it is the feeling that the action produces that determines peoples sense of justice. You can change a person's view of justice in society through propaganda, or controlling the flow of information just as much as it can change through the physical implementation of laws, enforcement, or personal action. For instance, consider the concentration camps in China and North Korea. While many of the people in normal incarceration systems ended up there by knowingly violating the rules and laws of a society, most of the people in these concentration camps ended up there through no discrete determinate action of their own. A person's sense of justice in those situations would absolutely depend on whether you were placed in a concentration camp or not, and could be directly controlled through the control of information and use of Nationalistic propaganda.

Everyone has different life experiences, and those differences cause us to feel different impacts from our societies justice system. To my knowledge, there has never been a Society that has been set up to have completely equal and fair System of Justice for all of the people in its Society. From the governing body of Communist Countries, to the Plutacrocy governments of the Socialist based Capitalist Countries of most of the world today, all Societies have unequal levels of justice built into their very structure. One could argue that there never has been a successful society that had predominately equal levels of justice for its citizens, and it may not even be possible. A counter argument of course is that there are enough vested interests from preventing a much more equal Society to form in the first place, and that the viability is unknown because of that.

So you can absolutely define Justice. Individually there are billions of different definitions of what justice means to specific people, and how they feel it is being implemented in a Society. Collectively, Justice is the determination of the effectiveness and equity of a societies governance and control of the actions of people towards each other. Retribution, protection, and deterrence all play a role in that, but the important thing is that the general social contract of behavior of society that people feel is either worth supporting and following and is therefore mostly Just, or it is not and is therefore mostly unjust.

Last edited by HoverBoarder; 1st March 2021 at 02:12 PM.
HoverBoarder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2021, 07:26 PM   #62
Nay_Sayer
I say nay!
 
Nay_Sayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Long Island
Posts: 3,848
https://cloudfront-us-east-1.images....QH42FUJTVE.jpg

A clothing store for young girls.
__________________
I am 100% confident all psychics and mediums are frauds.
If you see a Nazi. Egg them
Nay_Sayer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2021, 12:12 AM   #63
HoverBoarder
Graduate Poster
 
HoverBoarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,621
Justice is important as a measure of the effectiveness of a fair, open, and functional society. In the future I think that societies will have to evolve and change much faster in order to combat inefficiencies. In order to do that, I think many factors will have to be measured fairly regularly. Ideally including a public perception of justice.
HoverBoarder is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2021, 06:50 PM   #64
Gaetan
Illuminator
 
Gaetan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,876
Justice is to treat others as you want to be treated not as you are treated
Gaetan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2021, 07:07 PM   #65
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,627
Originally Posted by Gaetan View Post
Justice is to treat others as you want to be treated not as you are treated
That's not justice. That's either mercy or enlightened self-interest.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2021, 07:24 PM   #66
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,689
Originally Posted by Gaetan View Post
Justice is to treat others as you want to be treated not as you are treated
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
That's not justice. That's either mercy or enlightened self-interest.

There seems to be a lot of confusion in defining justice by those here. Not surprising really, given that it's a myth.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2021, 08:08 PM   #67
ynot
Philosopher
 
ynot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,918
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
There seems to be a lot of confusion in defining justice by those here. Not surprising really, given that it's a myth.
I agree. Justice is an attempt to make life fair, which life never is, was or could be. But it seems we gotta try.
__________________
Paranormal/supernatural beliefs are knowledge placebos.
Rumours of a godís existence have been greatly exaggerated.
Make beliefs truths and you get make-believe truths.
ynot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2021, 08:19 PM   #68
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,627
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
There seems to be a lot of confusion in defining justice by those here. Not surprising really, given that it's a myth.
Heh. You seem just as confused as the rest of us. But in fact none of us are confused. We're all just confident of different things. It's disagreement, not confusion.

In any case, you speak like a true moral nihilist! Good, good. Justice is a myth. Therefore so is mercy. Justice is a myth, and all its synonyms: Fairness, equity, desert. Rights, too, are a myth, and entitlements. There are no such things as war crimes. There is no such thing as theft, or murder. There is no such thing as fraud. There is no legitimate authority anywhere, as legitimacy itself is a myth. There is no cruelty. There is no respect. There is no humane treatment of animals, or of humans. All these ideas are myths, inventions of moral cowards. Few are brave enough, visionary enough, to dispense with them. Congratulations on taking such a momentous step away from false morality, and towards your true amoral self!
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2021, 09:11 PM   #69
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Ngunnawal Country
Posts: 71,061
Wow, that's a massive slippery slope you've drawn there.
__________________
We will meet them on the beach, we will meet them on the phone hook-ups.
- Scott Morrison, probably
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 07:01 AM   #70
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 14,470
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
And a society tends to go off the rails when it doesn't seem like there's any real retribution being applied by anybody - or at least not being applied equally to everybody.
Can you think of any examples of societies going off the rails because retribution wasn't being applied, in general?

I can understand the issue of retribution not being applied equally, but I can't think of any example where societies went off the rails because they felt that retribution was meted out fairly, but not enough.

I can see the issue in theory of people feeling that criminals don't get what they deserve. But in practice has that actually led to societies going off the rails?
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 11:37 AM   #71
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,627
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Wow, that's a massive slippery slope you've drawn there.
More of a sheer drop, I think. But where else is there to go, from "justice is a myth"? At the very least, all its synonyms, and all the related concepts that derive from it or depend on it, must also be myths.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 02:58 PM   #72
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,689
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Heh. You seem just as confused as the rest of us. But in fact none of us are confused. We're all just confident of different things. It's disagreement, not confusion.

In any case, you speak like a true moral nihilist! Good, good. Justice is a myth. Therefore so is mercy. Justice is a myth, and all its synonyms: Fairness, equity, desert. Rights, too, are a myth, and entitlements. There are no such things as war crimes. There is no such thing as theft, or murder. There is no such thing as fraud. ....... ect.

Boy oh boy.

A complete lack of comprehension or a complete lack of intellectual honesty?

Justice is a myth and therefore theft and murder are too???? You have a very broad brush of synonyms.

Kindly show me an example of my confusion about the subject of justice: I have tried to be open and frank on the subject.

Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Wow, that's a massive slippery slope you've drawn there.

You're telling me!
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 03:14 PM   #73
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,627
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
A complete lack of comprehension or a complete lack of intellectual honesty?
My guess is a partial lack of comprehension: You haven't really thought through all the implications of justice being a myth.

Quote:
Justice is a myth and therefore theft and murder are too???? : confused : You have a very broad brush of synonyms.
That one is definitely complete lack of comprehension on your part. I listed a bunch of synonyms for justice. Murder was not among them. Then I listed a bunch of other concepts that depend on justice. Murder was among those other concepts. It's unfortunate that you did not notice the shift in focus. Perhaps I should have used more paragraphs, to make it easier to follow. Sorry about that!

If justice is a myth, then injustice is necessarily also a myth. The concepts of theft and murder are premised on the principle of justice and its opposite, injustice. If justice is a myth, then there is no such thing as a just killing. Likewise, there is no such thing as an unjust killing. There is only killing. Murder, which is a word for unjust killing, does not exist without justice. The same is true for any other concept of crime or unfairness or sin that is premised on the myth of justice.

Likewise mercy, which is leniency where justice calls for consequences, is a myth. Mercy only exists in the context of justice withheld. If justice does not exist, then mercy does not exist.

Likewise rights. If justice does not exist, then it is not unjust to deprive you of your rights. If depriving you of your rights is not unjust, then the concept of rights is meaningless.

That's how I see it, anyway.

I would very much like to learn how you see it. In what sense do you see murder being real, if justice is a myth?

Last edited by theprestige; 24th March 2021 at 03:18 PM.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 03:18 PM   #74
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,689
My oh my!

You are a confused little Vegemite aren't you?
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 03:33 PM   #75
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,689
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Heh. You seem just as confused as the rest of us. But in fact none of us are confused. We're all just confident of different things. It's disagreement, not confusion.

In any case, you speak like a true moral nihilist! Good, good. Justice is a myth. Therefore so is mercy. Justice is a myth, and all its synonyms: Fairness, equity, desert. Rights, too, are a myth, and entitlements. There are no such things as war crimes. There is no such thing as theft, or murder. There is no such thing as fraud. There is no legitimate authority anywhere, as legitimacy itself is a myth. There is no cruelty. There is no respect. There is no humane treatment of animals, or of humans. All these ideas are myths, inventions of moral cowards. Few are brave enough, visionary enough, to dispense with them. Congratulations on taking such a momentous step away from false morality, and towards your true amoral self!

Forgotten what you have written now. The quest for clarification is getting hazy.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 03:40 PM   #76
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,627
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Forgotten what you have written now. The quest for clarification is getting hazy.
It's unfortunate that this still isn't clear to you. Let me rephrase:
Therefore so is mercy. Justice is a myth, and all its synonyms: Fairness, equity, desert.
the list of synonyms for justice ends here

the list of other concepts that depend on the concept of justice begins here
Rights, too, are a myth, and entitlements. There are no such things as war crimes. There is no such thing as theft, or murder.
Hopefully that is clear to you now, and we can move on to the much more interesting question: How do you see murder being real, if justice is a myth?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 04:22 PM   #77
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,689
Ok so you listed the murder thing after your so called list of synonyms. It looked like a continuation of the list to me.

Your list of "fairness, equity, and desert" are hardly synonyms for justice either and your question: "How do you see murder being real, if justice is a myth?" is way beyond my comprehension.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 04:37 PM   #78
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,627
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
Ok so you listed the murder thing after your so called list of synonyms. It looked like a continuation of the list to me.
Yes, exactly. Instead of wondering if maybe I'd started a new list, you jumped straight to saying I must be either stupid or dishonest. I think that was very unreasonable and very uncivil of you.

Quote:
Your list of "fairness, equity, and desert" are hardly synonyms for justice either and your question: "How do you see murder being real, if justice is a myth?" is way beyond my comprehension.
Maybe move on to my next post, where I explain my reasoning about murder, and address the argument I make there?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 05:20 PM   #79
Thor 2
Philosopher
 
Thor 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Brisbane, Aust.
Posts: 6,689
I wait with abated breath.
__________________
Thinking is a faith hazard.
Thor 2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 06:36 PM   #80
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50,627
Originally Posted by Thor 2 View Post
I wait with abated breath.
My bad. I meant my next post after the one that first confused you. No need to wait, it's already up:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...4#post13434324
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:43 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.