What is justice, there are different opinions. But justice does exist objectively, at least from a conscious level. Based on objectivism, this article grasps justice from the perspective of appearanceism.
Justice is an eternal topic in human society.
The History of the Concept of Justice#
In history, the Latin word "justice" (Justice) was named after the ancient Roman goddess of justice, Justitia. Plato regarded justice as a general virtue; Aristotle divided justice into distributive justice and corrective justice, and called it "fairness is proportionality"; Thomas Aquinas defined justice as a habit; Hobbes believed that justice only exists under a certain order; Bentham advocated that the standard of justice should be based on "utility"; Rawls' theory of justice as fairness believes that justice should first adhere to the principle of maximum equality and then treat disadvantaged groups differently...
Justice under Objectivism#
What is justice, there are different opinions. But justice does exist objectively, at least from a conscious level. Based on objectivism, this article grasps justice from the perspective of appearanceism. Unlike Marxist materialism, objectivism does not actively distinguish between material consciousness, but understands the problem from a material perspective. In the view of objectivism, consciousness is also material. Distinguishing between material consciousness is unnecessary. As a concept, justice does not only exist in ideas, or rather, what is the material basis that supports justice?
Justice is not necessarily achieved#
We can say that justice is God's rule, but justice is exerted by people. The Declaration of Independence of the United States declares that all men are created equal. This equality did not exist before the Emancipation Proclamation. It is just that this right has been realized due to the development of various contradictions. We can say that this is the result of the struggle of black people, or we can say that it is the victory of the bourgeoisie represented by the North in the Civil War, or we can say that it is a coincidence in terms of war tactics.
The causal relationship is objectively existent. Many reasons contribute to the same thing, even a butterfly should not ignore the magnitude of its force in causality. Or evaluate it quantitatively. These are no longer important, because black people have been liberated. Justice has been achieved.
I don't like to grasp it spiritually because I can't grasp it, so I grasp justice from the appearance of matter. Any justice needs to be realized through or embodied in the external aspects of things. So justice is nothing more than through people, the environment, and other factors, as well as things that I cannot understand.
In other words, justice that cannot be achieved is not justice. Because these external factors mentioned above cannot be satisfied at all. So the justice I understand must be achievable, but not necessarily achieved.
Justice is objective, constantly changing, and not absolutely certain#
Justice is not a rule that can be arbitrary. If black people demand a position above white people, it is not realistic. Justice is not an eternal and unchanging rule, just like the rise of the Planet of the Apes, animals will also get rid of the identity of objects. Justice is not absolute, luck is also part of strength, just like Schrödinger's cat, it is difficult to grasp or it is a law in itself.
Therefore, we can take the opposite of the former, justice is objective, constantly changing, and not absolutely certain.
The Material Basis of Justice#
Change does not mean relativism, just like my understanding of morality. Relativism means doubting everything. Specifically, it denies the existence of justice. This article judges justice from the perspective of appearanceism, removing the relative independence between subjectivity and objectivity, and looking at the material basis of justice.
The concept of justice exists in the hearts of everyone, and this concept is based on a balance formed among replaceable members of the group. Therefore, as long as the human group is replaceable, human justice will not disappear. Because, I think this is a product of the balance of group power. However, I think justice exists not only in tribes but also in metropolises. What changes is the scale and degree of evolution of the group, which I think may affect justice.
I understand the world from the perspective of appearance, and I can only deduce appearances.
Justice exists in different political systems of human society#
In my opinion, there is justice in totalitarian societies, as well as in democratic societies.
Rawls is solving the problem of justice, while I am only expressing what I think justice is. Justice is not determined by belief, but belief is related to justice. Since justice is something that does exist, it also exists in totalitarian societies.
For a group like human society, as long as individuals are replaceable, human justice will not be eliminated. Because, I think this is a product of the power of the group. However, I think justice exists not only in tribes but also in metropolises. What changes is the scale and degree of evolution of the group, which I think may affect justice.
I understand the world from the perspective of appearance, and I can only deduce appearances.
Justice exists beyond human society#
Justice is not only between humans. Pigs on the chopping board will never seek justice like humans, but when preparing to slaughter pigs, they will resist capture by ramming. Pigs are objects of humans, but because of the pig's resistance, the world has changed. When catching pigs, people may feel troublesome and give up, or they may hear the sound of crying and feel pity. This influence may not make us give up eating it, but it will definitely give the pig a sense of satisfaction.
The Principle of Justice is the Existence of the Group#
Utilitarianism seems to be a somewhat vulgar term. But one of the underlying logics of this article is utilitarianism.
Take justice as an example, what effect does justice produced by a group want to achieve?
Is it to immerse people in the pursuit of justice, or to fight for justice? There is no doubt that justice has value for individuals. In the halo of justice, countless heroes bend. Especially in the present, when the future is uncertain and the world is declining, the sense of justice is the pillar that keeps us fighting.
But more importantly, there is justice at the group level, at the level of appearance. Justice is a principle of distributing interests within a group, which is generated by the group and is subject to the relationship between individuals and the group, that is, the replaceability of individuals.
As long as it is labeled as a group, justice will inevitably appear. When justice disappears, the group will no longer exist. For the group, the best form of its development is the group form. Maybe everyone thinks this is nonsense, and nothing has been said. But in fact, the group form hides the source of justice. Since it is a group, it naturally wants to maintain the group form and constantly approach the highest form of the group, that is, justice.
What is utilitarianism? What kind of cognition will have what kind of interests, and what kind of interests will have what kind of utility, so utilitarianism is a universal evaluation method. But you can't say that one side is right and the other side is wrong. If you must use a set of concepts to enrich utilitarianism, it can only be the social contract theory.
Justice is the principle that the group must abide by in order to exist, and this principle becomes justice when it enters individuals.
Utilitarian justice is the principle that the group maintains the group, that is, the principle that the group must abide by in order for the group to survive. Because of the relatively stable relationship between individuals and the group, justice is further constructed within the group as the prosperity, efficiency, development, and equal opportunities of the group...
This content is sourced
Summary of Justice#
Definition of Justice#
Therefore, justice is a tendency, a tendency to give everything what it deserves. This tendency does not mean the result has already been achieved, but changes with the change of material power. Justice does not only exist in humans, but also in all things that can influence the objective world.
The Material Carrier of Justice#
Gaius pointed out in the "Institutes of Law" that "justice is the constant and perpetual wish to render every one his due."
JUSTICE is the constant and perpetual wish to render every one his due.—— link
The view of justice in this article is similar to this viewpoint. The most core sentence is "what is due". And this due is determined by the actual power of the subject.
For example, when a person is treated unfairly, he can fight for his rights through public opinion, the judiciary, his own force... Is the judiciary and public opinion part of individual power?
Do not easily deny the concepts in a concept, and should distinguish the scope of the effectiveness of individual power. People can directly control their arms to fight, but disabled people cannot; pilots can control planes to bomb, but those who know nothing about machinery, even if they have planes, cannot; leaders can start wars, but how many people can decide to start wars? The misery of children is more likely to move the public, but adults are less likely than children.
So gentlemen are not different, everything is objectivism. So individual power is a hierarchical and objective concept.
As for how it works and what is the standard for judging what is due, it is "the survival of the fittest", which is the relative stability of the relationship between individuals and the group. But there are many known and unknown factors involved. This can be discussed again.