What is Justice?

Discuss morality and ethics in this message board.
Featured Article: Philosophical Analysis of Abortion, The Right to Life, and Murder
Post Reply
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Terrapin Station »

Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 2:15 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: May 12th, 2020, 11:20 am

Functionally, "what justice is supposed to accomplish" tends to be what I said: the distribution of rewards and/or punishments in a manner that folks feel is reasonable and equitable in a given situation.

The problem is that you're never going to come to a universal agreement about just what (distribution of) rewards and/or punishments are reasonable and equitable. There will always be disagreements, and those disagreements will always result in some level of discord. That's because we're talking about inherently subjective assessments. There's no way around that. One needs to recognize that the assessments are inherently subjective and then adjust one's expectations accordingly.
They need not be "inherently subjective". In lawmaking we can consider practical evidence, the opinions of experts, and even trial and error in moving things forward and expanding agreement.
It's not that they're subjective due to logical necessity (so in that sense they "need not be"), but they're subjective contingently, due to what the world is like. It's a fact re how things are.

The opinions of "experts" aren't something other than subjective. I put "expert" in quotation marks there because one can't be an expert on a subjective assessment issue--there's nothing to get right.

Considering practical evidence doesn't make one's assessment non-subjective. And neither does trial and error.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8265
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 2:05 pm When you say that "injustice is unfair" does that equate to "it is unfair to steal from me because we have an agreement to respect and protect each other's right to our property"?
Not intentionally, no. All I meant to do was to emphasise the synonymous nature of "just" and "fair", in the eyes of a typical human.

Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 2:05 pm One of the things Kant suggested was that we should only pass laws that we ourselves are willing to be subject to. It's what I like to call "a rule for making rules". So I imagine "fairness" is treating everyone equally under the law.
Not necessarily. Fairness is justice, and it is different for everyone. But I don't think it's so different that each individual has a markedly different standard of justice. In general, the differences are minor, and often/usually differences of degree. Fairness is ... well we probably won't agree on exactly what fairness is, and yet we all know it when we see it, and more particularly when we don't. The degree of emotional commitment that many of us have for justice is surprising to me. Even animals like dogs have a clearly observable sense of fairness. My dogs know if one of them has had more biscuits than the others, and they're not impressed. I believe other animals behave likewise.

Laws and their enforcement can be quite different from justice and fairness, which is why courts of law so often fail to deliver justice. No law can be written in advance to cover all possible situations where it might be applied in the future. So sometimes an accused person receives an obviously unjust judgement because the law is written so as to allow no other course of action. Laws should be guidelines that a court uses to dispense justice. But that's another topic, and another rant. 🙂
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Marvin_Edwards
Posts: 1106
Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
Favorite Philosopher: William James
Contact:

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Marvin_Edwards »

Terrapin Station wrote: May 12th, 2020, 2:31 pm
Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 2:15 pm

They need not be "inherently subjective". In lawmaking we can consider practical evidence, the opinions of experts, and even trial and error in moving things forward and expanding agreement.
It's not that they're subjective due to logical necessity (so in that sense they "need not be"), but they're subjective contingently, due to what the world is like. It's a fact re how things are.

The opinions of "experts" aren't something other than subjective. I put "expert" in quotation marks there because one can't be an expert on a subjective assessment issue--there's nothing to get right.

Considering practical evidence doesn't make one's assessment non-subjective. And neither does trial and error.
How do you distinguish subjective from objective? Don't we have a small problem here in that objective is also subjective?
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Terrapin Station »

Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 3:14 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: May 12th, 2020, 2:31 pm

It's not that they're subjective due to logical necessity (so in that sense they "need not be"), but they're subjective contingently, due to what the world is like. It's a fact re how things are.

The opinions of "experts" aren't something other than subjective. I put "expert" in quotation marks there because one can't be an expert on a subjective assessment issue--there's nothing to get right.

Considering practical evidence doesn't make one's assessment non-subjective. And neither does trial and error.
How do you distinguish subjective from objective? Don't we have a small problem here in that objective is also subjective?
First, it's important to stress that what's at issue here doesn't hinge on the specific definitions of the terms. In any event, I use the standard definition where subjective pertains to mental phenomena and objective refers to the complement of mental phenomena--so any phenomena "outside" of mentality, or we could more roughly say any phenomena that are independent of persons.

Again, the terms do not matter. Whatever we call it, assessments about things like reasonable, fair, equitable, etc. distributions of rewards versus punishments a la justice only occur as mental phenomena, and as such, there's nothing to get right, because there's no non-mental phenomena that we can successfully match or fail to match in saying that some distribution is just or not just. All we're doing is reporting how we feel about the distribution. Different people feel different ways.
User avatar
Marvin_Edwards
Posts: 1106
Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
Favorite Philosopher: William James
Contact:

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Marvin_Edwards »

Pattern-chaser wrote: May 12th, 2020, 3:00 pm
Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 2:05 pm When you say that "injustice is unfair" does that equate to "it is unfair to steal from me because we have an agreement to respect and protect each other's right to our property"?
Not intentionally, no. All I meant to do was to emphasise the synonymous nature of "just" and "fair", in the eyes of a typical human.

Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 2:05 pm One of the things Kant suggested was that we should only pass laws that we ourselves are willing to be subject to. It's what I like to call "a rule for making rules". So I imagine "fairness" is treating everyone equally under the law.
Not necessarily. Fairness is justice, and it is different for everyone. But I don't think it's so different that each individual has a markedly different standard of justice. In general, the differences are minor, and often/usually differences of degree. Fairness is ... well we probably won't agree on exactly what fairness is, and yet we all know it when we see it, and more particularly when we don't. The degree of emotional commitment that many of us have for justice is surprising to me. Even animals like dogs have a clearly observable sense of fairness. My dogs know if one of them has had more biscuits than the others, and they're not impressed. I believe other animals behave likewise.

Laws and their enforcement can be quite different from justice and fairness, which is why courts of law so often fail to deliver justice. No law can be written in advance to cover all possible situations where it might be applied in the future. So sometimes an accused person receives an obviously unjust judgement because the law is written so as to allow no other course of action. Laws should be guidelines that a court uses to dispense justice. But that's another topic, and another rant. 🙂
Right, many species exhibit an innate sense of fairness. There's a video on youtube of an experiment where two monkeys are given different rewards for the same task and the one with the less appetizing reward gets really angry.

And, like you say, no law can cover all possible variations. One of the problems with principles is that they have to be short enough to be remembered, so their application requires some judgment.

Fixed sentencing, where the judge has no latitude (like the 3 Strikes laws) can also make justice harder to achieve.
User avatar
Marvin_Edwards
Posts: 1106
Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
Favorite Philosopher: William James
Contact:

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Marvin_Edwards »

Terrapin Station wrote: May 12th, 2020, 3:59 pm
Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 3:14 pm How do you distinguish subjective from objective? Don't we have a small problem here in that objective is also subjective?
First, it's important to stress that what's at issue here doesn't hinge on the specific definitions of the terms. In any event, I use the standard definition where subjective pertains to mental phenomena and objective refers to the complement of mental phenomena--so any phenomena "outside" of mentality, or we could more roughly say any phenomena that are independent of persons.

Again, the terms do not matter. Whatever we call it, assessments about things like reasonable, fair, equitable, etc. distributions of rewards versus punishments a la justice only occur as mental phenomena, and as such, there's nothing to get right, because there's no non-mental phenomena that we can successfully match or fail to match in saying that some distribution is just or not just. All we're doing is reporting how we feel about the distribution. Different people feel different ways.
We can often objectively determine the relative justice of two competing laws. For example, compare the law that required people to return runaway slaves versus the law that abolished slavery. And we did it with the criteria of "the best good and least harm for everyone". This judgment is not a matter of subjective opinion, but of objectively observed benefits and harms.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Terrapin Station »

Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 4:19 pm We can often objectively determine the relative justice of two competing laws. For example, compare the law that required people to return runaway slaves versus the law that abolished slavery. And we did it with the criteria of "the best good and least harm for everyone". This judgment is not a matter of subjective opinion, but of objectively observed benefits and harms.

So (1), "We should us the formula, 'The 'best good' and least harm for everyone'" is nothing like a fact. That's not something we can get right or wrong--that we should use that as a metric. It's just going to be a preference that some people have.

And (2). "Returning runaway slaves," "Abolishing slavery" seen as good/bad, or a benefit vs. a harm is also NOT a fact that somehow obtains in the world outside of minds. Whether those things are good or bad are only a matter of preferences that people have. Different people have different preferences.
User avatar
Marvin_Edwards
Posts: 1106
Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
Favorite Philosopher: William James
Contact:

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Marvin_Edwards »

Terrapin Station wrote: May 12th, 2020, 4:36 pm
Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 4:19 pm We can often objectively determine the relative justice of two competing laws. For example, compare the law that required people to return runaway slaves versus the law that abolished slavery. And we did it with the criteria of "the best good and least harm for everyone". This judgment is not a matter of subjective opinion, but of objectively observed benefits and harms.

So (1), "We should [use] the formula, 'The 'best good' and least harm for everyone'" is nothing like a fact. That's not something we can get right or wrong--that we should use that as a metric. It's just going to be a preference that some people have.

And (2). "Returning runaway slaves," "Abolishing slavery" seen as good/bad, or a benefit vs. a harm is also NOT a fact that somehow obtains in the world outside of minds. Whether those things are good or bad are only a matter of preferences that people have. Different people have different preferences.
Here's one objective measure of harm: the number of whipping scars on a person's back. If we eliminate slavery, we eliminate that harm. This harm "obtains in a world outside of minds". So, it is an objective measure. And it would be a simple matter to convince the slave master that this harm is objectively real, by applying the whip to his back.
Syamsu
Posts: 2645
Joined: December 9th, 2011, 4:45 pm

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Syamsu »

Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 8:33 am
Syamsu wrote: May 12th, 2020, 6:51 am

Justice is not abstract, but subjective. You just succeed in ripping the emotions out of the justice system. Consequently noone feels justice is being done, but instead it is just a bureacratic process of no emotional significance.
A Billy comes to his father saying that Tommy stole his lunch. His father finds Tommy, punches him in the face, and breaks his nose. Is that justice?
It FEELS too heavy punishment.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Terrapin Station »

Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 5:31 pm
Here's one objective measure of harm: the number of whipping scars on a person's back.
Where, extramentally, do we find anything like "whipping someone is bad," or "leaving scars on someone's back (from whipping, say) is bad"? Can you give me the location of that, or at least what it's a property of/how the property obtains (the property of "this is bad"/"this is a harm" (with a negative connotation)) in the materials/structures/processes in question?

And it would be a simple matter to convince the slave master that this harm is objectively real, by applying the whip to his back.
Isn't someone being convinced, someone having an opinion a la "this is bad" a mental phenomenon?
User avatar
Marvin_Edwards
Posts: 1106
Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
Favorite Philosopher: William James
Contact:

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Marvin_Edwards »

Syamsu wrote: May 12th, 2020, 5:51 pm
Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 8:33 am

A Billy comes to his father saying that Tommy stole his lunch. His father finds Tommy, punches him in the face, and breaks his nose. Is that justice?
It FEELS too heavy punishment.
There is a sense of justice that comes ingrained in many species. Here's a youtube video of one of these experiments: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KSryJXDpZo

It likely evolved because it provided a survival advantage within communities of a species.

The notion of "rights", I think, comes from our sense that something is not right, that is, not as it ought to be. So, yeah, I think you're right that we do feel something is not right. But then we need to figure out what ought to be done about it (that thing that's not right). We deliberate upon the means to accomplish our ends, and there are also feelings within that deliberation as we imagine the consequences of different alternatives. So, yeah, I think you're on to something.
User avatar
Marvin_Edwards
Posts: 1106
Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
Favorite Philosopher: William James
Contact:

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Marvin_Edwards »

Terrapin Station wrote: May 12th, 2020, 6:32 pm
Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 5:31 pm
Here's one objective measure of harm: the number of whipping scars on a person's back.
Where, extramentally, do we find anything like "whipping someone is bad," or "leaving scars on someone's back (from whipping, say) is bad"? Can you give me the location of that, or at least what it's a property of/how the property obtains (the property of "this is bad"/"this is a harm" (with a negative connotation)) in the materials/structures/processes in question?
The harm is objective. Unnecessary pain is an objective harm. Also the skin keeps out harmful bacteria. So the whipping risks infection, another objective harm. This is not a matter of subjective opinion (unless you wish to argue that these harms are merely imagined).
Marvin wrote: And it would be a simple matter to convince the slave master that this harm is objectively real, by applying the whip to his back.
Terrapin wrote:
Isn't someone being convinced, someone having an opinion a la "this is bad" a mental phenomenon?
Sure. But our perception of objective reality is also a mental phenomenon. Therefore the distinction between objective and subjective cannot be a matter of whether one or the other is a mental phenomenon. You see, both are. You'll need to redefine your distinction between subjective and objective.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8265
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 4:13 pm Fixed sentencing, where the judge has no latitude (like the 3 Strikes laws) can also make justice harder to achieve.
Yes, we are all aware of juries occasionally finding someone not guilty, even when they are obviously guilty, because the penalty mandated by the law is unjust in this particular case. But when a jury does this, they are guilty themselves of something approaching perjury. But they take the risk and do it because we all consider justice more important than rigid adherence to the law.

Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 7:43 pm The harm is objective. Unnecessary pain is an objective harm. Also the skin keeps out harmful bacteria. So the whipping risks infection, another objective harm. This is not a matter of subjective opinion (unless you wish to argue that these harms are merely imagined).
It's more a matter of deciding whether the infliction of pain is justified, possibly to keep the victim safe by punishing them for doing something dangerous, or one of the infinite number of variations on this theme. Objectivity plays no significant part in this, whether we take it to mean impartial or unbiased, or whether we take it to its absolute extreme (correspondence with that which actually is). This is a balance, and the decision is a moral one. Not much room for objectivity there, I don't think?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Marvin_Edwards
Posts: 1106
Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
Favorite Philosopher: William James
Contact:

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Marvin_Edwards »

Pattern-chaser wrote: May 13th, 2020, 8:22 am Objectivity plays no significant part in this, whether we take it to mean impartial or unbiased, or whether we take it to its absolute extreme (correspondence with that which actually is). This is a balance, and the decision is a moral one. Not much room for objectivity there, I don't think?
We should always attempt to make moral judgments objective. They have consequences.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: What is Justice?

Post by Terrapin Station »

Marvin_Edwards wrote: May 12th, 2020, 7:43 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: May 12th, 2020, 6:32 pm

Where, extramentally, do we find anything like "whipping someone is bad," or "leaving scars on someone's back (from whipping, say) is bad"? Can you give me the location of that, or at least what it's a property of/how the property obtains (the property of "this is bad"/"this is a harm" (with a negative connotation)) in the materials/structures/processes in question?
The harm is objective. Unnecessary pain is an objective harm. Also the skin keeps out harmful bacteria. So the whipping risks infection, another objective harm. This is not a matter of subjective opinion (unless you wish to argue that these harms are merely imagined).
Hold on a second. Read the questions I asked again. I'm asking you WHERE do we find something . . . can you give me the LOCATION.

You didn't answer with anything like where or a location.
Post Reply

Return to “Ethics and Morality”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021