Justice

[Gregorius]

So, the other day, I'm hanging out at the Campus Ministry Office with a bunch of students, and one of them reads a paper he wrote on some philosopher's idea justice to everyone else for proofreading purposes, and it was okay, except it sounded so artificial, like he didn't even care about his opinion. Sure enough, when I asked him what he really thought about justice, he basically said it doesn't exist/is totally irrelevant to today's society as that is something made up by people and is just another way of controlling others. I personally thought he was being theoretical and/or ignorant about reality, but he seemed to honestly believe this in literal terms. But then, I tend to believe that all Goodness, including Justice, comes from God, and as this person was agnostic/atheist, I didn't know how to explain it to him in terms he understood. So then that got me wondering: Can there be an absolute definition of Justice without God?

So what do you all think? Am I explaining myself well enough?

[aalpha1989]

Nietzsche believed that justice was constructed for control... that's really the only logical conclusion for atheists.

If you don't believe in God, why would you believe in an objective truth about right and wrong, good and bad, black and white? There's no point in any "code of ethics" if that code doesn't get you what you want. Nihilism is the only atheism which attempts to be intellectually honest (though Bishop Sheen says it is an atheism of the will, not of the intellect).

I do believe that justice is of God, and that there is an objective answer to every situation dealing with it. I don't believe that it could be fully explained to someone who didn't believe in God. Anyway, to get a better understanding of it I would read the first book of Plato's [i]Republic[/i] and sections of Nietzsche's [i]Geneology of Morals[/i], if you can stomach it. I almost barfed when I read it.

[Productive Catholic]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='22 October 2009 - 07:50 PM' timestamp='1256266234' post='1990033']
Nietzsche believed that justice was constructed for control... that's really the only logical conclusion for atheists.

If you don't believe in God, why would you believe in an objective truth about right and wrong, good and bad, black and white? There's no point in any "code of ethics" if that code doesn't get you what you want. Nihilism is the only atheism which attempts to be intellectually honest (though Bishop Sheen says it is an atheism of the will, not of the intellect).

I do believe that justice is of God, and that there is an objective answer to every situation dealing with it. I don't believe that it could be fully explained to someone who didn't believe in God. Anyway, to get a better understanding of it I would read the first book of Plato's [i]Republic[/i] and sections of Nietzsche's [i]Geneology of Morals[/i], if you can stomach it. I almost barfed when I read it.
[/quote]

I agree with the reading of [i]The Republic[/i] Plato. First of all, Plato does an exceptional job of 1. Showing that justice isn't about a power struggle in his dialogue with Thrasymachus (i.e. a means to control), and 2. That Justice is and idea (or Plationic form) that exists outside of man, but is a part of man's existence. All intellectual and moral virtues are attainable is some way without the help of divine assistance. Aquinas noted that this was possible, but also suggested that without the theological virtues the natural virtues could not be fully realized. In essence, the natural virtues are almost divinized by the theological virtues.

Modern philosophy (rather, I should say philosophy taught in schools) assumes a post-Cartesian framework of philosophy, and rejects the wisdom of the ancients. Hence, philosophy students of today typically fall for the notion that Justice is a means of control, rather than laugh at the notion, which was so thoroughly wooped by Plato.

[CatherineM]

Justice can be subjective. Let's use the example of a well publicized case, Lee, the man who beheaded the kid on the Greyhound bus. He was un-medicated for schizophrenia when the attack occurred, so he was found non-competent and sent to the mental hospital. Justice for the kid's parents might be his execution. Justice for Lee might be to receive the treatment he needed, and to be re-integrated into the life he should have had, but now won't. Justice for Lee's wife might have been a Community Treatment Order to force her husband to have taken his medication, but she wouldn't have requested one due to cultural issues. Justice for everyone who has schizophrenia, whose lives are made a little harder every time one of these incidents happens, might be universal care.

See, in the real world, justice depends on what side of the prison bars you end up on.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='26 October 2009 - 11:05 AM' timestamp='1256569534' post='1991490']
Justice can be subjective. Let's use the example of a well publicized case, Lee, the man who beheaded the kid on the Greyhound bus. He was un-medicated for schizophrenia when the attack occurred, so he was found non-competent and sent to the mental hospital. Justice for the kid's parents might be his execution. Justice for Lee might be to receive the treatment he needed, and to be re-integrated into the life he should have had, but now won't. Justice for Lee's wife might have been a Community Treatment Order to force her husband to have taken his medication, but she wouldn't have requested one due to cultural issues. Justice for everyone who has schizophrenia, whose lives are made a little harder every time one of these incidents happens, might be universal care.

See, in the real world, justice depends on what side of the prison bars you end up on.
[/quote]

No. If justice is truly a virtue (and it is), then it can never contradict itself- truth cannot contradict truth. There is always an objective answer, even if you can't see it. Justice cannot be subjective because it means to give to each person what they deserve. Parents whose children are murdered by schizophrenics do not deserve to see the schizophrenics die, precisely [i]because[/i] the murderer is schizophrenic. It is unjust to punish beyond necessity. To desire more than true justice is to desire vengence.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Productive Catholic' date='26 October 2009 - 05:17 AM' timestamp='1256545034' post='1991410']
I agree with the reading of [i]The Republic[/i] Plato. First of all, Plato does an exceptional job of 1. Showing that justice isn't about a power struggle in his duologue with Thrasymachus (i.e. a means to control), and 2. That Justice is and idea (or Plationic form) that exists outside of man, but is a part of man's existence. All intellectual and moral virtues are attainable is some way without the help of divine assistance. Aquinas noted that this was possible, but also suggested that without the theological virtues the natural virtues could not be fully realized. In essence, the natural virtues are almost divinized by the theological virtues.

Modern philosophy (rather, I should say philosophy taught in schools) assumes a post-Cartesian framework of philosophy, and rejects the wisdom of the ancients. Hence, philosophy students of today typically fall for the notion that Justice is a means of control, rather than laugh at the notion, which was so thoroughly wooped by Plato.
[/quote]Great answer. You should be posting in a couple of threads where people are struggling with the distinction between amorality and atheists. Atheists do not believe in a omnipotent, all knowing, and involved God who is all Goodness and Perfection. However, that does not preclude them from speculating on aspects of humanity that are spiritual, or have more meaning the the immediate NOW. Christian though borrows much from the ancient philosophers without a problem, assimilating what philosophers surmise as a fact of recognizing God's plan without knowing God.

Perfect justice will not be experienced in this world because of the frailties of humanity. With effort, we avoid complete injustice, but no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

[Productive Catholic]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='26 October 2009 - 09:01 AM' timestamp='1256572900' post='1991521']
No. If justice is truly a virtue (and it is), then it can never contradict itself- truth cannot contradict truth. There is always an objective answer, even if you can't see it. Justice cannot be subjective because it means to give to each person what they deserve. Parents whose children are murdered by schizophrenics do not deserve to see the schizophrenics die, precisely [i]because[/i] the murderer is schizophrenic. It is unjust to punish beyond necessity. To desire more than true justice is to desire vengence.
[/quote]

Agreed. Virtues are not subjective or we could not call them virtues. In order to reach something (like the perfection of a virtue) there necessarily has to be an absolute, or else we could never reach the goal. So to try and attain a subjective good or virtue would be like saying "It is good to like the taste of chocolate pudding." To place an opinion or taste in the realm of being good or evil would be a bit of nonsense, since whether enjoying the taste of chocolate pudding cannot be good or evil. Therefore to say that Justice is subjective, you it would be removed from the realm of good and evil, since it becomes a matter of opinion or taste.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Anomaly' date='26 October 2009 - 12:20 PM' timestamp='1256577654' post='1991545']
Great answer. You should be posting in a couple of threads where people are struggling with the distinction between amorality and atheists. Atheists do not believe in a omnipotent, all knowing, and involved God who is all Goodness and Perfection. However, that does not preclude them from speculating on aspects of humanity that are spiritual, or have more meaning the the immediate NOW. Christian though borrows much from the ancient philosophers without a problem, assimilating what philosophers surmise as a fact of recognizing God's plan without knowing God.

Perfect justice will not be experienced in this world because of the frailties of humanity. With effort, we avoid complete injustice, but no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
[/quote]
Oh come on. Don't snipe using another thread. You know very well that I'm backing up my position with logical arguments, and I've done so the whole way through.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='26 October 2009 - 02:30 PM' timestamp='1256578240' post='1991557']
Oh come on. Don't snipe using another thread. You know very well that I'm backing up my position with logical arguments, and I've done so the whole way through.
[/quote]It was an invite to join the other thread, not a snipe. He did provide a clear answer and valid point that's relative to the other thread. And since he identified himself as a Catholic, some may be willing to give PC a little bit of creedence.

[Productive Catholic]

Haha, hopefully I am not causing strife. I am very much faithful to the Magisterium, but I love philosophy (especially Christian philosophy) and the idea that natural virtues can be known by atheists is in line with Catholic philosophical thought. However, I should add that I do believe that the origins of that morality (and I believe both Plato and Aristotle allude to this) lead to a Supreme being. So in essence, can an atheist be moral and virtuous, yes. Can virtue exist without God, no. This is where existentialist atheists like Jean Paul Sartre would agree. Hence his famous quote

[font="Arial, Helvetica"][size="-1"][color="#990000"]"The existentialist... thinks it very distressing that God does not exist,because all possibility of finding values in a heaven of ideas disappears along with Him; there can no longer be an a priori Good,since there is no infinite and perfect consciousness to think it.Nowhere is it written that the Good exists, that we must be honest,that we must not lie; because the fact is we are on a plane where there are only men. Dostoevsky said, "If God didn't exist, everything would be possible." That is the very starting point of existentialism.Indeed, everything is permissible if God does not exist, and as a result man is in despair, because neither within him nor without does he find anything to cling to. He can't start making excuses for himself."

[/color][/size][/font]I hope I am making sense.
[font="Arial, Helvetica"] [/font]

Edited October 27, 2009 by Productive Catholic

[Winchester]

For great justice, take off every zig.

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Productive Catholic' date='26 October 2009 - 09:06 PM' timestamp='1256601982' post='1991769']
Haha, hopefully I am not causing strife. I am very much faithful to the Magisterium, but I love philosophy (especially Christian philosophy) and the idea that natural virtues can be known by atheists is in line with Catholic philosophical thought. However, I should add that I do believe that the origins of that morality (and I believe both Plato and Aristotle allude to this) lead to a Supreme being. So in essence, can an atheist be moral and virtuous, yes. Can virtue exist without God, no. This is where existentialist atheists like Jean Paul Sartre would agree. Hence his famous quote

[font="Arial, Helvetica"][size="-1"][color="#990000"]"The existentialist... thinks it very distressing that God does not exist,because all possibility of finding values in a heaven of ideas disappears along with Him; there can no longer be an a priori Good,since there is no infinite and perfect consciousness to think it.Nowhere is it written that the Good exists, that we must be honest,that we must not lie; because the fact is we are on a plane where there are only men. Dostoevsky said, "If God didn't exist, everything would be possible." That is the very starting point of existentialism.Indeed, everything is permissible if God does not exist, and as a result man is in despair, because neither within him nor without does he find anything to cling to. He can't start making excuses for himself."

[/color][/size][/font]I hope I am making sense.
[font="Arial, Helvetica"] [/font]
[/quote]
You've really got to post in the other threads.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Winchester' date='26 October 2009 - 08:31 PM' timestamp='1256603514' post='1991776']
For great justice, take off every zig.
[/quote]


What you say?

~Sternhauser