Philosophy: What is Justice?
What is justice?
During the conversation, the concept of justice arises... Polimarcus claims that justice is the act of truth-telling. Socrates then asks, “Is it just to tell people, unprovoked, that they look bad? Or did something poorly? Is it always just to tell the truth?” Polimarcus said that it was not and rethinks his position.
He then claims justice is repaying what's owed. Socrates seeks to discover the truth by testing his claim, “But speaking of this very thing, justice, that we define as paying back what one has received from anyone, or may these very actions sometimes be just and sometimes unjust? I mean, for example, as everyone I presume would admit, if one took weapons from a friend who was in his right mind and then the lender should go mad and demand them back, that we ought not to return them in that case and that he who did so return them would not be acting justly.” “You are right,” Polimarcus replied.
“Then this is not the definition of justice." Glaucon then suggests, "Justice is treating your enemies badly and your friends well." I replied, "Do we always know who is our friend and who is our enemy?" "I guess not." Said Glaucon.
"Then let's say justice is treating badly those who treat us badly and treating well those who treats well." "That sounds better," I said. "However, consider this, does a just man do what's productive for society?" "Ofcourse" said Glaucon. "And is treating badly, those who treat us badly productive to society?" "What do you mean? “Does dryness make something wet? Does heating something make it cold?" I said. "No?" Guessed Glaucon. "Does treating someone badly make them more productive to society?" "I guess not." "Then treating someone badly can't be just because it's not productive to society." "By Zeus, Socrates! It appears justice doesn't mean anything." "Oh, Glaucon, I wouldn't say that. Give it another go." "No matter what I say you'll disagree." "You have my word that that is not my aim."
"Well it appears to me that justice is what is good for the powerful. What is good for the powerful usually means safety and security to the less powerful." "Tell me Glaucon, do the powerful make mistakes?" "Of course" "So if someone powerful makes a mistake and orders something they think is good for themselves but actually isn't then it's just to do something that harms the powerful." "Oh Socrates, I give up! You're hopeless! Ok, then go ahead and tell us what justice is." I told him, "I honestly don't know. I was hoping we could decide together."
Even today we're still struggling to figure out what justice is.
Distributive Justice
Justice as Equality – The belief that everyone should get the same kind and amount of stuff.
Pro: No matter how rich or poor you are you get the same treatment. Con: The rich don’t need the same as the poor
Need-Based Justice – everyone shouldn’t get the same, cuz our needs aren’t the same.
Pro: The poor should get more because they need more. Con: Are the rich being discriminated because of what they have?
Merit-based Justice – means giving unequally, based on what each person deserves.
Pro: People get given what they earn. Con: If they don’t have the means to earn then they don’t get.
Scenarios
The government is giving grants to children going to college
A neighborhood needs to collect money to fix a road
A charity is handing out food
A job gives it’s employees an annual allowance of sick days
Retributive Justice
Retributive Justice – the only way for justice to be satisfied is for a wrongdoer to suffer in proportion to the way he’s made others suffer.
An eye for an eye. Life for a life. However, what about accidental murder? Fair?
Do we have the right to take someone else’s life even if they’ve taken someone else’s? Do two wrongs make a right?
People who commit crimes are more likely to come from a troubled upbringing, is it fair to punish them for a bad had?
As Socrates says, "Does treating someone badly make them more productive to society?"
Corrective Justice Welfare Maximization – there’s no good to be found vindictively causing pain to wrongdoers. But some form of punishment is still in order.
Punished with a focus on rehabilitation. Violent offenders get counseling and meaning. Thieves get jobs and reeducation.
Restorative Justice – the focus is on making amends rather than on making the wrongdoer suffer
Restorative justice focus’ on helping the victim rather than focusing on punishing the guilty. The criminal can also be part of the restorative process by participating in community service.
Mediators and counselors are used to communicate between the victim and offender to decide on the punishment. During the process the offender consents to the punishment and hears how the crime harmed the victim.
Examples
Graffiti
- Should we spray paint their house?
- Fine & Art Classes?
- Clean the damage & additional community service?
Traffic accident
- Traffic school?
- Equal Damage to their car?
- Pay for repairs and rental car?
Bullying
- Bully back?
- Education about the harm of bullying and seeing it from the victims view?
- Counseling for the bully, why does he feel the need to do it?
Drugs
- Prison sentence?
- Rehab?
- Community Service helping people with health problems caused by drugs?
Murder
- Death Sentence?
- Rehabilitation in prison with an aim to make them a useful member of society?
- Expressing regret to the families of the victim, bringing closure, helping them recover financially and mentally?
What are some problems with Retributive, Corrective and Restorative Justice? Is one form better than others?
Circumstantial Justice
Moral Luck: Crash Course Philosophy #39 - YouTube
When it comes to sentencing for prison inmates, when things stop being a crime do we release them? Even though it was a crime when they broke the law?
Comments
Post a Comment