What is justice, opinions vary. 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 in a determined order; Bentham advocated that the standard of justice should be based on "utility"; Proudhon believed that justice means a system that allows everyone to be satisfied with the least obstacles and waste; Rawls' theory of justice as fairness believes that justice should first adhere to the principle of maximum equality and freedom, and on this basis, treat disadvantaged groups differently...
Justice under Objectivism#
What is justice, opinions vary. 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 problems 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 in other words, what is the material basis that supports justice?
Justice is not necessarily achieved#
We can say that justice is God's rules, 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 was just that this right was realized through the development of various contradictions. We can say that this is the result of the struggle of black people, or we can say it is the victory of the bourgeoisie represented by the North in the Civil War, or we can say it is a coincidence in terms of war tactics.
Cause and effect relationships are objectively existent. Many causes contribute to the same thing, even a butterfly should not ignore its strength 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. Any justice can only take effect through or be contained 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 also not an eternal and unchanging rule, just like in Planet of the Apes, animals will also break away from the role 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's Long-Term Stability: Refuting Relativism#
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 be eliminated. Because, in my opinion, 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 size of the group and the degree of evolution, 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 in Human Society#
In my opinion, even totalitarian societies have justice, and so do 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 disappear. Because, in my opinion, 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 size of the group and the degree of evolution, 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 charging. Pigs are objects of humans, but because of their resistance, the world has changed. When capturing 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 them, but it will definitely give the pigs a sense of relief.
Justice is the Principle of Group Existence#
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 need to achieve?
Is it to immerse people in the pursuit of justice, or to fight for justice? Undoubtedly, 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, a sense of justice is the pillar that keeps us fighting.
But more importantly, justice at the group level, justice at the appearance level. Justice is a principle of distributing interests within a group, a principle generated by the group, and 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 no longer exists. 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 utilitarianism, 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 must abide by in order to maintain the group, that is, the principle necessary for the survival of the group. Because the relationship between individuals and the group is relatively stable, justice is further constructed within the group as the prosperity, efficiency, development, and equal opportunities of the group...
This content source
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 it changes with the change of material power. Justice does not only exist in humans, but also in all things that can have an impact on the objective world.
The Material Carrier of Justice#
Gaius pointed out in "The Ladder 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, and his own power... 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 effectiveness of individual power. People can directly control their arms to fight, but disabled people cannot; pilots can control planes to bomb, but people who know nothing about machinery cannot, even if they have planes; 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" based on the power comparison between each other. But it also includes many known and unknown factors. This can be discussed again.