I am sorry, it is difficult for me to understand thy doctrine on justice. Try to make more strict definitions.

That is just the point...People have been trying to define justice and every other moral concept as long as people have been doing poetry and thinking about things... We can all reach an opinion of justice in the issue between Agamemnon and Achilles which caused the deaths of so many brave Greeks...Eventually, in every issue arrising from our activity the justice of others can only be a guide... We all have to define it for ourselves... We all have to define it according to the actors and the situation... Generally, as a form/idea, Justice is a form of relationship... But what is not??? So as a form of relationship, who is it between???? Is it between the individual and every other individual in society, or is it between the individuals disputing over its meaning in their situation... It may perhaps become both, but it is primarily between those fighting over the meaning of justice in their case...

Well, yes, justice is conceived to be a kind of relationship. Am I understand thee right that what is just for me may be not just for thee? So, if I am deprived of something, then I may remain in limits of my justice, that is I was treated just, whereas some one with another understanding of it is not?..

In any dispute, justice is what the people agree to freely...It does not mean there is no inequality, or that one does not give grudgingly, or that the other does not demand too much... Marriages are seldom equal, but they are like most relationships, worked out...The thing is, that just as in Marriage, justice is worked out in consideration of ones life... We all need survival from our relationships...Not enough from our relationships and we die... Not enough truth, or love, or justice; and we die... Behind much violence is the need for life... Those people who kill because they are dissed, or those primitives who die still for honor are killing for something they cannot live without....For some people violence is a choice... What percentage is that???I was in a situation once where if I did not kick my Bisiness Agent's asss, that Nothing would have happened to me except that I would have been dishonored, and my income would certainly have suffered... So I punched him so hard in the nose that it broke his back, and because I did not invite him outside, it cost me my union membership, and I had to retire... I did not have a choice, but I could still have done things differently... The only thing is, that some times no choices seem evident... We should always look for that choice, but understand that everyone is entitled to a defense of self, and some times that means a defense of honor, which stands for self...

What for to defend something? Is it worth of such sacrifices?

What??? is your question???

I know that moral philosophers are not necessarily activists. Yet if one asks the question how can I make peace more of a relaity, here is a relevant quote from Yoko Ono:
"This is an age where one hero cannot conquer Evil.
Evil is a dis-ease presented to us as our fate.
Many times, it is presented to us as an illusion of goodness, so we get confused, don't free ourselves from it and be destroyed by it.
To conquer evil, each one of us must first clearly see what it is? that it is a curable dis-ease.
Then work to release us from it's power in a way we can.
Luckily, there are so many of us in the world, it is enough for all of us to do what we can do with joy, and not feel depressed that we are not doing enough.
We should first IMAGINE PEACE, since we create our destiny by first imaging what destiny we want for ourselves.
We should ask others to IMAGINE PEACE as well.
One thing that is interesting is you cannot be violent while you are imagining peace.
If all of us in the world imagined peace at all times, there will be no time for us to create dis-ease of any kind.
The next thing we should do is to ask to heal the world by asking your healing power to come out in a big way.
Your intent of healing will start to show it's power by just asking for it.
Sometimes, you will be healing a situation which is not near you, so you won't see it's effect.
But healing is being done, regardless.
Again, when all of us in the world ask the world to be healed, it will be.
Know that it is that simple.
Because all of us are one.
We affect each other right away.
We affect each other even when we are in fear, confusion, anger, and wanting to destroy the world and help to increase the dis-ease.
That's how effective we are.
Start doing what you can do.
The Universe will be affected right away as you start to think in the right way to correct the dis-ease in our world.
Start with something small.
Do one nice thing a day.
Call your mom and tell her you are thinking of her.
Look at the tree and admire it's beauty in words and in action.
Send a message to your friend what you respect about her/him.
Send your message through the internet how you love life and why..well, that's big!
If you keep doing that for three months you will see the difference in your life.
Be creative.
Do what you can do.
By that, you will be starting the wheels of goodness to turn.
Lots of love,
yoko"


The war is over -- if you want it.

---------- Post added at 09:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:46 PM ----------



In response to your inquiry I'll present a value-dimensional analysis. To understand more about the basic dimensions of value, I refer you to an essay I wrote with Wade Harvey enetitled LIVING THE GOOD LIFE;
http://tinyurl.com/24swmd


Formal Axiology (founded by the phihosopher Robert S. Hartman) has something to say about the concept "Justice" that may be helpful. What do you think: does the applications of the tools of the science of values, when applied to this concept elucidate the subject?

I shall define JUSTICE as meaning: "the restoration and maintenance of a balance."

There are at least four modes of justice, on a continuum from worst to best; this analysis says that justice is a matter of degree rather than just "black or white."

These dimensions are: Transposed Justice (fragmented value), which is Retribution or Retaliation, an "eye for an eye," which - as Gandhi told us - eventually "renders everybody blind."

Next, there is -- when the Systemic Value dimension is applied to "justice" -- Equality or Equal treatment under law. "Every one is entitled to his day in court," "All are equal in the eyes of the law."
[And Law itself can be analyzed by the axiological dimensions into (S):Statute Law, (E):Common Law, and (I):Moral Law, each one worth more than the last.]

And then there is Compensation or Equity: one doesn't trade an apple for an automobile, quid quo pro, a judge taking into consideration the circumstances of the perpetrator's life, etc. This is the result of Extrinsic Value being applied to "justice."

When Intrinsic Value is applied, we get: Rehabilitation or Reconciliation. An illustration of this form of justice may be what was the practice in some African tribe when a murderer's dispensation was that he had to enter into the extended family of his victim, and assume all the responsibilities of the one he is replacing, and in this way he paid his debt to the community.

Recently, in the Western World we find that the practice of "creative sentencing" on the part of some jurists often contributes to rehabilitation of offenders.

This is a formal axiological analysis of Justice.



If you want more details about what is known as value science (a body of knowledge about values), see Appendix One, pages 73-80, in my major book, ETHICS: A College Course
http://tinyurl.com/2mj5b3
This manual is more technical and thus harder to read than the earlier reference cited above at the end of the first paragraph of this post. You may look up Professor Hartman's bio in Wikipedia if you want to know more about my teacher and mentor.

The abstraction of evil does not make it more understandable; only more banal... It is a moral reality... We see it at work, in its causes and effects; and we call it by a name...Yet; the idea that a hero can banish evil is ludicrous...By common consent we could agree well enough to not do evil, and let that rest on our honor... What we consider evils, conditions no man would wish for himself would be far from an end... But is it not these evils that we spread by choice??? How many would you kill to prolong your life for a moment...What if you did not have to do more than wish them dead??? To have riches we wish poverty...To have love we wish hate...To provide for our future generations we wish to deprive this generation...So there is no reason to look for evil outside of ourselves, or seek to do battle with it outside of our door...