How do we know that everything we have come to determine as “true” is not merely an illusion? In this world, sometimes we are able to catch glimpses of the true light behind the artificial fire in “Plato’s cave;” however, from a historical standpoint, usually we end up across multiple opinions. Consequently, it is almost impossible to ever become fully illuminated when we consider achieving justice. Within the relation of time, justice is an ever changing entity that is fueled by differing opinions. In rectificatory justice, it is the arbitrator or the justice’s bias that creates precedent. Even though these individuals are neutral by definition, nothing is ever simple as black and white.
Hammurabi’s code was based on the same simplistic, logical idea, “an eye for and eye.” As cliché as it may sound, there are probably a million varieties of grays in this color scheme, and they each represent an individual’s opinion. Who is to say that one person’s opinion is right and another individual’s is wrong? An arbitrator or judge is created to help provide a neutral solution; however, when we look at the United States, and when it comes time to elect a Supreme Court Judicial, it becomes a serious business. Nominating a potential judicial Supreme Court justice, the president is not looking solely at what is all “fair and dandy,” but what will help him win reelections the following year. As Plato says, the person best suited for ruling is probably the individual that does not have the desire to rule. Ultimately, the individuals we have in power have a political agenda of their own. As their duty is to determine the law of the land, how can individuals resist the law and act towards their views of justice if it goes against the social norms? We like to think that we are taking justice into the positive direction with abolition of slavery, and equal rights for all, but how do we know for sure that we are not taking acts such as affirmative action too far to the point that we are causing reverse discrimination? It is our society; it is the people that determine what justice is in their particular time while they live on earth, because what I believe justice to be now will not be the same in one hundred years.
Is justice a stagnant concept, or does it have the ability to be different for different groups of people? Is a civilization their own arbitrator when considering justice?
I definitely think that the concept of justice can be different in different times to different groups of people. As Aristotle says, being just or displaying other virtues comes from knowledge of how to be just/virtuous and from performing acts of these natures. Often times, the knowledge needed to perform just actions comes from observations of what others do in a given society. Since people behave differently in different times and places, what people observe as being just can change, thereby making the concept of justice a changeable thing.
ReplyDeleteOne reason that the concept of justice can change is that people are always searching for the golden mean, and sometimes the golden mean is not very clear and may seem different in different circumstances. This is why we have questionable things in our society such as affirmative action; people aren’t sure what exactly the golden mean is so they take somewhat of a guess based on our particular society’s conception of justice.
I also think that the concept of justice can change over time. Throughout history, mistakes are made from which future generations (hopefully) learn. For instance, when slavery was still legal in the United States, those in the government did not seem to see anything unjust about it. With the passage of time, though, society has come to see slavery as having been extremely unjust. As society and its norms change, so does the concept of justice.
ReplyDeleteFrom this, it only makes sense to conclude that different societies, currently coexisting in the world, also have discrete ideas of justice. Since societal customs, traditions, and norms determine how people think and what they deem as good or bad, their concepts of what is just will also vary accordingly.