What is Justice?

[Jus Naturale]

Justice (implementing an appropriate action for some form of wrong-doing) and Ethics (what is right and wrong), are completely different.

How can one implement an appropriate action for some form of wrong-doing without reference to what is right and wrong?

 

[Beefbisquit]

How can one implement an appropriate action for some form of wrong-doing without reference to what is right and wrong?

They can't.

But much like the police and judges are distinct, justice and ethics are distinct.

Both are pretty much completely subjective, save a few things common across all cultures. Unjustified (what is unjustified is highly subjective) murder isn't tolerated, if possible, and there seems to be a strong anti-incest drive across all races.

There are tribes where paranoia and deception are prized assets, and compassion and caring are seen as weaknesses.

And with ethics you could talk about deontological ethics (some things are right simply because they are right, or wrong simply because they are wrong), or utilitarian ethics (actions that help the greatest number of people are best, and actions that cause detriment to the most are the worst), to name two of the biggest schools of ethics.

 

[GregS]

Michael Sandel teaches immensely popular classes at Harvard. There are several online lectures in his "Justice" series that are well worth seeing. You will find many constructive insights. Interacting with students, they provide many interesting twists.

http://www.justiceharvard.org/

 

[Selah]

This thread is more about General Semantics as formulated by Alfred Korzybski in his wonderful book Science and Sanity.

"Justice" is a high level abstraction with no physical referent as a space-time event. It's a solely mental construction. It's impossible for someone to show us "justice", nor is it possible to find a common definition on which everyone can agree.
This makes it highly irrelevant to talk about as long as people are not aware of the use of such abstractions.

We are trying to make the world behave as our words behave, this is a rather futile exercise considering reality only abides to natural laws. A perfect illustration of this is when a judge says: "Justice has been served." People will agree with him, or not depending on their own personal convictions, but was the crime erased? Is there an entity justice who appreciates the service? The answer is clearly "no", regardless of how our words behave.

There is no such thing as objective morality, albeit morality is highly subjective and culturally induced.

If you where a headhunter in the amazon I would come to you and ask: "Doesn't it bother you to have five shrunken heads around your neck?" And you would answer: "Yes, my brother has ten." That doesn't make you insane, you're well adjusted to the society you live in.

I'm not saying morality doesn't serve any purpose, nor that everything should be allowed on these grounds. I'm just pointing out our limitations in order to come to a full comprehension of said "justice" and "morality".

 

[MellowFarmer]

To be honest I do not see a problem with the conrol of any substance, I can go down the street and get anyone of these just as you can, it is really about self control, but as a very wise woman once said, "Anarchy rapidly becomes a free for all", what would society become without the control of certain substances, such as cocaine and heroin, especially cocaine, atleast half of the people I know do it every weekend and a good tenth are addicted to it.

Who was this "wise" woman? Anarchy gets a bad rep from the people in control who tell you how to think, what to think and when to think it.

You have friends who use cocaine every weekend? What detrimental effects on society have you observed from their behavior while on cocaine? What is the change in their behavior when not on cocaine? Is cocaine a controlled substance where you live and if so, how is that working out for you?

How often do you smoke pot? I smoke every day. Am I addicted to cannabis?

Do you see how confused they have made you? To answer your original question, Justice is blind. That means it cannot see past what those who control it want it to see. A rich man's justice is not the same as a poor man's justice, and our leaders like Bush and Cheney never have to face justice.