You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Geometric Morality # 2: Justice
Thank you for your comment. It's realy nice to see other opinions :)
justice is "doing fair acts".
What is fair acts? To be fair is relative. Justice is relative. If you was read Politeia, you saw what I mean. Many terms are actually subjective. The rules set for it always have a hole. I think a perfect law is not possible. You can not be fair where you do not have perfection.
Well I don’t need to read it to know that it is subjective. I actually said exactly that ("there has to be a point of view"= subjectivity)!
I also was not talking about perfect law, only justice. If the rules are set to benefit the society (if everyone in the society was not forced to agree on them), then the only hole it all has is that someone might be accused of something he did not do and he wouldn’t have any prove, or someone would do something bad and there wouldn’t be anything to prove it with. But those are not holes in the "justice system" but rather in the means of gathering information. The "justice system" doesn’t have to be perfect as long as those who are part of it agreed to it. Then it can safely be called justice even if there is no free will. Whatever makes the decisions have accepted the rules, and if they are broken, the individual is met with justice, free will, or not free will.
Well I guess I can agree with you for that part;
Because that is really good point and sorry for "there has to be a point of view", I missed :)
As I said it was a perfect article compiling work and thoughts of many great philosophers. I’m glad that at the end we managed to agree even on the summary:)