What Is Justice? : Crash Course Philosophy #40
video description
Date: 2022-04-04
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
Ramaraksha
When it comes to murder there is no such thing as justice - all we can do is Vengeance - Hollywood loves the latter - the Kill Bill movies - something bad happens to the hero/heroine at the beginning of the movie and then the rest of the movie is a blood-fest, the audience blood lust is satisfied & they go home happy. But did the hero/heroine get their loved ones back, did they get their life back? How is it justice when that did not happen?
Some time ago a young child was kidnapped, raped and killed - they caught the attacker - he was known to the family & he now sits in jail might be executed. But regardless of what happens to him how does it help the poor girl whose life was taken away from her? She didn't get to grow up, hang out with friends, first crushes, first dances, college, a career, falling in love, marriage, kids, grand kids! - all the joys of life that the rest of us got to enjoy were denied to her - where is the justice for this kid?
And how about her parents - each and every day the pain lingers - each and every day they miss their kid, her shrieks of laughter, her innocence. As each year passes they would say -she would be doing this by now. - - tormenting thoughts that will haunt them until they die
Do they care that the evil person who did this is suffering in jail or is going to be executed?
I totally doubt it
No Justice for these parents either
Crazy thing is that when it comes to religion, poor God can do no better - all he can do is deliver Vengeance - here religion uses it famed forked tongue - they tell the poor grieving parents that the evil person who did this will be dealt with severely by God and then they will go to the criminal and tell him to repent, God is so forgiving, he will forgive and he can scoot off to Heaven!
Regardless of the conniving religion, where are the educated to ask how come God can do no better?
All God can do is deliver Vengeance? Torture the criminal? But that does nothing for the victims as we saw above
And the whole sick concept of forgiveness - not one person points out that Judges do not have that right. No judge can take it upon himself to forgive the criminal, that right is the victims alone! Only the victim has the right to forgive. God is not going to help the criminal cheat their victims
But to me this is the amazing thing that keeps happening - the brainwashing of people by religion
reply
When it comes to murder there is no such thing as justice - all we can do is Vengeance - Hollywood loves the latter - the Kill Bill movies - something bad happens to the hero/heroine at the beginning of the movie and then the rest of the movie is a blood-fest, the audience blood lust is satisfied & they go home happy. But did the hero/heroine get their loved ones back, did they get their life back? How is it justice when that did not happen?
Some time ago a young child was kidnapped, raped and killed - they caught the attacker - he was known to the family & he now sits in jail might be executed. But regardless of what happens to him how does it help the poor girl whose life was taken away from her? She didn't get to grow up, hang out with friends, first crushes, first dances, college, a career, falling in love, marriage, kids, grand kids! - all the joys of life that the rest of us got to enjoy were denied to her - where is the justice for this kid?
And how about her parents - each and every day the pain lingers - each and every day they miss their kid, her shrieks of laughter, her innocence. As each year passes they would say -she would be doing this by now. - - tormenting thoughts that will haunt them until they die
Do they care that the evil person who did this is suffering in jail or is going to be executed?
I totally doubt it
No Justice for these parents either
Crazy thing is that when it comes to religion, poor God can do no better - all he can do is deliver Vengeance - here religion uses it famed forked tongue - they tell the poor grieving parents that the evil person who did this will be dealt with severely by God and then they will go to the criminal and tell him to repent, God is so forgiving, he will forgive and he can scoot off to Heaven!
Regardless of the conniving religion, where are the educated to ask how come God can do no better?
All God can do is deliver Vengeance? Torture the criminal? But that does nothing for the victims as we saw above
And the whole sick concept of forgiveness - not one person points out that Judges do not have that right. No judge can take it upon himself to forgive the criminal, that right is the victims alone! Only the victim has the right to forgive. God is not going to help the criminal cheat their victims
But to me this is the amazing thing that keeps happening - the brainwashing of people by religion
reply
Ramaraksha
Restorative Justice is the only correct way because this is the only way in which the VICTIM is compensated. Retributive Justice is not Justice it is Vengeance, an eye for an eye, You kill mine, I kill yours, then you kill more of mine and I will. you can see where this goes
You caused a crash, some damage to a parked car - Retributive Justice or vengeance would be for the owner of the damaged car to run into yours, cause an equal damage. So basically two wrongs make a right.
But in Restorative Justice, you pay to fix the damage to that other car, the Victim is happy, he gets his car back as it was, you cleaned up your mess - the more civilized way of doing things
The amazing thing is that when it comes to religion the Victim gets no Justice from God
All God can do is either forgive the criminal or torture him(Retributive Justice or Vengeance) - either method does nothing for the victim. The poor victim does not even get an apology but religion is happy to tell the criminal to apologize to God(repent, God will nicely forgive and off you go to Heaven
And the poor victim is wondering, so what about me? God and the criminal get together and decide the criminal can be forgiven? So a criminal cries before the Judge and the Judge can forgive him? No Judge will do that - it is against the law. All a Judge can do is follow the law, all a Jury can do is to decide whether the criminal is guilty or not
No Judge can decide that a criminal can be forgiven, that right belongs to the victim alone!
And yet religion is happy to prattle on about God's forgiveness
Amazing that not one educated person sees how wrong this is
God is not going to help the criminal cheat his victims
reply
Restorative Justice is the only correct way because this is the only way in which the VICTIM is compensated. Retributive Justice is not Justice it is Vengeance, an eye for an eye, You kill mine, I kill yours, then you kill more of mine and I will. you can see where this goes
You caused a crash, some damage to a parked car - Retributive Justice or vengeance would be for the owner of the damaged car to run into yours, cause an equal damage. So basically two wrongs make a right.
But in Restorative Justice, you pay to fix the damage to that other car, the Victim is happy, he gets his car back as it was, you cleaned up your mess - the more civilized way of doing things
The amazing thing is that when it comes to religion the Victim gets no Justice from God
All God can do is either forgive the criminal or torture him(Retributive Justice or Vengeance) - either method does nothing for the victim. The poor victim does not even get an apology but religion is happy to tell the criminal to apologize to God(repent, God will nicely forgive and off you go to Heaven
And the poor victim is wondering, so what about me? God and the criminal get together and decide the criminal can be forgiven? So a criminal cries before the Judge and the Judge can forgive him? No Judge will do that - it is against the law. All a Judge can do is follow the law, all a Jury can do is to decide whether the criminal is guilty or not
No Judge can decide that a criminal can be forgiven, that right belongs to the victim alone!
And yet religion is happy to prattle on about God's forgiveness
Amazing that not one educated person sees how wrong this is
God is not going to help the criminal cheat his victims
reply
Mark
Nozick and Meritocracy: Nozick and Rawls never studied biology.
Phenotypic norms of reaction gums up the theories.
Most organisms will not respond to various environments (niches) with the same favor (norm of reaction.
Meaning that you could be very good at batting and be a very poor fielder or pitcher.
This is because the genetic variance you, or anyone, posses
One fundamental right and drive is for people to have children and they do.
Lots of -unskilled- people have children and due to the luck of genetic combination they can produce highly talented children.
These children did not make any choices at to where they were born and poor education robs them of achieving their self interest to the best ability
It also robs society of better prepared contributors.
Donald Trump and all of the billionaires can not find enough talented employees and this and a stifled economy harms all
In 1947 there was a symposium at Princeton celebrating the Modern Synthesis of Biology
The same area of biology that Herbert Spencer had great interest in.
Ernst Mayr debated Stephen Jay Gould, and was no Marxist.
Read What Evolution Is by Mayr (2001) of not another of his books
reply
Nozick and Meritocracy: Nozick and Rawls never studied biology.
Phenotypic norms of reaction gums up the theories.
Most organisms will not respond to various environments (niches) with the same favor (norm of reaction.
Meaning that you could be very good at batting and be a very poor fielder or pitcher.
This is because the genetic variance you, or anyone, posses
One fundamental right and drive is for people to have children and they do.
Lots of -unskilled- people have children and due to the luck of genetic combination they can produce highly talented children.
These children did not make any choices at to where they were born and poor education robs them of achieving their self interest to the best ability
It also robs society of better prepared contributors.
Donald Trump and all of the billionaires can not find enough talented employees and this and a stifled economy harms all
In 1947 there was a symposium at Princeton celebrating the Modern Synthesis of Biology
The same area of biology that Herbert Spencer had great interest in.
Ernst Mayr debated Stephen Jay Gould, and was no Marxist.
Read What Evolution Is by Mayr (2001) of not another of his books
reply
Mohammed
I believe that you have to contribute to society if you can and it is not going to harm you. if you were able to be a billionaire that is not only because you deserve it. you were able to do so because of the environment around you. you were able to do so because of your parents because of your family, friends, school, college, people you like, and even people you hate because you might learned not to be like them. my point is if society helped you be what you are, you should payback. you owe the society, you owe the other people starting from your parents (like it or not. this idea is originally from a Muslim belief that says you have you must thank god for what he gave you by giving -some- of what you have AND don't need to people in need. that is a form of justice for me since you will only pay part of the money that you don't need. I would like to listen to your comments.
reply
I believe that you have to contribute to society if you can and it is not going to harm you. if you were able to be a billionaire that is not only because you deserve it. you were able to do so because of the environment around you. you were able to do so because of your parents because of your family, friends, school, college, people you like, and even people you hate because you might learned not to be like them. my point is if society helped you be what you are, you should payback. you owe the society, you owe the other people starting from your parents (like it or not. this idea is originally from a Muslim belief that says you have you must thank god for what he gave you by giving -some- of what you have AND don't need to people in need. that is a form of justice for me since you will only pay part of the money that you don't need. I would like to listen to your comments.
reply
Brandon
I can't be the only one who sees Nozick's argument for a lack of equalization of privilege more then a little circular, I mean he states that we're entitled to keep what we have provided we didn't obtain it unjustly but what is -just- is the entire crux of the debate. It's circular logic, to assume his argument you must assume a definition of Justice that fits his definition, which he uses to prove his argument. His position answers or addresses basically nothing, since it says nothing about Justice, only that we shouldn't try to change things if they're obtained justly- which rests on the assumption of what Justice is.
reply
I can't be the only one who sees Nozick's argument for a lack of equalization of privilege more then a little circular, I mean he states that we're entitled to keep what we have provided we didn't obtain it unjustly but what is -just- is the entire crux of the debate. It's circular logic, to assume his argument you must assume a definition of Justice that fits his definition, which he uses to prove his argument. His position answers or addresses basically nothing, since it says nothing about Justice, only that we shouldn't try to change things if they're obtained justly- which rests on the assumption of what Justice is.
reply
Medhead101
Yes this video does a good job explaining the libertarian way of thinking which is that it would be unjust to arbitrarily punish a group people by using force to take their money so that it can be transferred to another group of people just because they are less well off. That's not justice and it's plainly immoral so it's morally binding to reduce the size and scope of the state and to minimise taxation.
reply
Yes this video does a good job explaining the libertarian way of thinking which is that it would be unjust to arbitrarily punish a group people by using force to take their money so that it can be transferred to another group of people just because they are less well off. That's not justice and it's plainly immoral so it's morally binding to reduce the size and scope of the state and to minimise taxation.
reply
Miguel
Distributive justice is only an issue if there's scarcity. If we can create an abundance, which we can with the vast majority of stuff, then we don't need to consider justice at all. If we lived in a moneyless society where everything was just produced, we can all pick up as much as we want as there would be lots left over (provided you don't go picking up 10 yachts or something ridiculous like that.
reply
Distributive justice is only an issue if there's scarcity. If we can create an abundance, which we can with the vast majority of stuff, then we don't need to consider justice at all. If we lived in a moneyless society where everything was just produced, we can all pick up as much as we want as there would be lots left over (provided you don't go picking up 10 yachts or something ridiculous like that.
reply
MockUpGuy
We would be better off, especially in politics, if the word justice did not exist. Instead of saying -I want justice- which means nothing since everyone has their own take on it, people should say what they really want. I want wrongdoers to suffer because it would make me feel good. Or I wanna keep my wealth for myself because I don-t care about average joe.
reply
We would be better off, especially in politics, if the word justice did not exist. Instead of saying -I want justice- which means nothing since everyone has their own take on it, people should say what they really want. I want wrongdoers to suffer because it would make me feel good. Or I wanna keep my wealth for myself because I don-t care about average joe.
reply
Spencer
Chamberlain can ask for more, but it-s up to his employer and the contract he signed as to whether he -deserves- that extra money. That is freedom - consent from both the employer and the employee. Merit-based justice (along with individual freedom) is the only sane way to structure society.
reply
Chamberlain can ask for more, but it-s up to his employer and the contract he signed as to whether he -deserves- that extra money. That is freedom - consent from both the employer and the employee. Merit-based justice (along with individual freedom) is the only sane way to structure society.
reply
10
You know when I think of justice I think it a way to get back at someone after all we all get what we deserve we take something from the world the world will take something from us may it be our lives or are way of living or something we found valuable nothing is free without a price
reply
You know when I think of justice I think it a way to get back at someone after all we all get what we deserve we take something from the world the world will take something from us may it be our lives or are way of living or something we found valuable nothing is free without a price
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
