Late Cut Posted March 15, 2011 Posted March 15, 2011 I was rereading the Republic by Plato, and would love to have your thoughts on two topics that are prominent throughout the Republic; Justice and the Ideal State. Why do men behave justly? Is it because they fear societal punishment? Are they trembling before notions of divine retribution? Do the stronger elements of society scare the weak into submission in the name of law? Or do men behave justly because it is good for them to do so? Is justice, regardless of its rewards and punishments, a good thing in and of itself? How do we define justice? Plato identifies political justice as harmony in a structured political body. An ideal society consists of three main classes of people—producers (craftsmen, farmers, artisans, etc.), auxiliaries (warriors), and guardians (rulers); a society is just when relations between these three classes are right. Each group must perform its appropriate function, and only that function, and each must be in the right position of power in relation to the others. Rulers must rule, auxiliaries must uphold rulers’ convictions, and producers must limit themselves to exercising whatever skills nature granted them (farming, blacksmithing, painting, etc.) Justice is a principle of specialization: a principle that requires that each person fulfill the societal role to which nature fitted him and not interfere in any other business. At the end of Book IV, Plato tries to show that individual justice mirrors political justice. He claims that the soul of every individual has a three part structure analagous to the three classes of a society. There is a rational part of the soul, which seeks after truth and is responsible for our philosophical inclinations; a spirited part of the soul, which desires honor and is responsible for our feelings of anger and indignation; and an appetitive part of the soul, which lusts after all sorts of things, but money most of all (since money must be used to fulfill any other base desire). The just individual can be defined in analogy with the just society; the three parts of his soul achieve the requisite relationships of power and influence in regard to one another. In a just individual, the rational part of the soul rules, the spirited part of the soul supports this rule, and the appetitive part of the soul submits and follows wherever reason leads. Put more plainly: in a just individual, the entire soul aims at fulfilling the desires of the rational part, much as in the just society the entire community aims at fulfilling whatever the rulers will. How would you define Justice? Is it an inate need or quality? Are we "just" because of fear of reprisal? Or is Justice inate to our nature?
ganeshran Posted March 15, 2011 Posted March 15, 2011 IMO Justice is not innate to our nature or any other mammal for that matter. Justice or goodness is drilled into an individual by Society through fear of punishment, or of not conforming to societal norms and being rendered an outcast, and lastly out of fear. Without these checkpoints, any individual can commit unjust acts, and indeed many do
youngindia Posted March 15, 2011 Posted March 15, 2011 Or is Justice inate to our nature?[\quote] Both genes and environment matters.its like you may have talent or predisposition towards good qualities.but you have to develop them...the same for bad qualities as well. :)
Late Cut Posted March 15, 2011 Author Posted March 15, 2011 Is that true, does justice equate to rationality? Is appetite contrary to bein just?
youngindia Posted March 15, 2011 Posted March 15, 2011 How would you define Justice? i am not going by the essay...my views.. Individuals are supposed to pursue intersts without malignantly and unjustly hurting others(like robbing money)... This answers your "Is appetite contrary to bein just?" To ensure order and contentment in society ,you have to mete out justice Are we "just" because of fear of reprisal? people who are too selfish and self serving tend to think they can get whatever they want unless they get caught.This kind of people have weak sense of justice and infact prone to injustice. Reprisals are highly APPROPRIATE for this kind of people. other people are likely to have an innate sense of justice to obey laws(in varying extents from medium to strong ) .More stronger your sense of justice, less likely you are to fall for the temptation. There are people whose sense of justice becomes misguided and perverted ...like a poor man who thinks poverty gives him a right to can rob for his money....or a terrorist who deludes himself he is fighting for muslims. does justice equate to rationality? going by the essay, ONLY if all three parts perform their allotted functions properly in conjunction. '
ganeshran Posted March 16, 2011 Posted March 16, 2011 Is that true' date=' does justice equate to rationality? Is appetite contrary to bein just?[/quote'] No justice doesnt equate to rationality. Rationality is taking the best possible decision using reason and arriving at a judgment given all the information available to you. In a parallel universe, if the underlying parameters change and lead to a situation where a reasonable judgment would go against the established norms for just behaviour, then a rational decision wouldn't be a just one.
ravishingravi Posted March 16, 2011 Posted March 16, 2011 No justice doesnt equate to rationality. Rationality is taking the best possible decision using reason and arriving at a judgment given all the information available to you. In a parallel universe, if the underlying parameters change and lead to a situation where a reasonable judgment would go against the established norms for just behaviour, then a rational decision wouldn't be a just one. Exactly!!
Late Cut Posted March 16, 2011 Author Posted March 16, 2011 Well, I'd argue that just behavior is and has to be rational behaviior, and therefore, the concept of what is just and unjust is a universal truth, and as such, what is Just would hold true no matter what the norms. Law on the other hand, has to do with norms, and not justice, as an end to itself. Enlightened law and justice would be parallel.
ganeshran Posted March 16, 2011 Posted March 16, 2011 I disagree. There is no universal truth per se. What we consider just is simply what we observe around us and what is accepted as just by the majority of society. Though justice and law dont completely overlap with each other, they do intersect quite a bit since both are enforced by society. IMO the fear of social rejection discourages more people in engaging in unjust behavior than the fear of actual punishment. If these factors dont exist, the majority of individuals will feel no qualms in committing both illegal and unjust acts.
Guest Shivani Posted March 18, 2011 Posted March 18, 2011 Are we "just" because of fear of reprisal? YES! We are just because of fear of sanction. However orderly a society may be, and to whatever extent men may appear to obey the law of reason, the element of force and fear of such force is ALWAYS present. Men behave justly not because of fear of enforcement of law or societal norms by formal institutions like legislation, military force, police, administrative devices etc. only, but also because of informal institutions like gossip, slander, resentment, public opinion, sympathy, folkways, mores, customs, religion and morality. They are deep rooted in tradition and more effective in primary groups. Any deviance or aberrance from the prescribed behavior creates the fear of being "labelled". So I don't think the sense of justice is something that a man is born with. Its always and always the fear of social sanction.
Sachin=GOD Posted March 18, 2011 Posted March 18, 2011 YES! We are just because of fear of sanction. However orderly a society may be' date=' and to whatever extent men may appear to obey the law of reason, the element of force and fear of such force is ALWAYS present. Men behave justly not because of fear of enforcement of law or societal norms by formal institutions like legislation, military force, police, administrative devices etc. only, but also because of informal institutions like gossip, slander, resentment, public opinion, sympathy, folkways, mores, customs, religion and morality. They are deep rooted in tradition and more effective in primary groups. Any deviance or aberrance from the prescribed behavior creates the fear of being "labelled". So I don't think the sense of justice is something that a man is born with. Its always and always the fear of social sanction.[/quote'] Well put :hatsoff:
Guest Shivani Posted March 18, 2011 Posted March 18, 2011 Well put :hatsoff: Great post' date=' Shivani. :two_thumbs_up:[/quote'] hain jiiii ? thaanks :P
Late Cut Posted March 18, 2011 Author Posted March 18, 2011 YES! We are just because of fear of sanction. However orderly a society may be' date=' and to whatever extent men may appear to obey the law of reason, the element of force and fear of such force is ALWAYS present. Men behave justly not because of fear of enforcement of law or societal norms by formal institutions like legislation, military force, police, administrative devices etc. only, but also because of informal institutions like gossip, slander, resentment, public opinion, sympathy, folkways, mores, customs, religion and morality. They are deep rooted in tradition and more effective in primary groups. Any deviance or aberrance from the prescribed behavior creates the fear of being "labelled". So I don't think the sense of justice is something that a man is born with. Its always and always the fear of social sanction.[/quote'] Great post... But what you are talking about seems to be the appearance of justice rather than being just. A person can uphold the laws of a society and be lawful, but not just. For example, human sacrifice was prevalent and expected in many older cultures, however, it would not be just, though it might be lawful. A just man would not fear recrimanation, and would uphold certain values regardless of circumstance.
Guest Shivani Posted March 18, 2011 Posted March 18, 2011 Great post... But what you are talking about seems to be the appearance of justice rather than being just. A person can uphold the laws of a society and be lawful, but not just. For example, human sacrifice was prevalent and expected in many older cultures, however, it would not be just, though it might be lawful. A just man would not fear recrimanation, and would uphold certain values regardless of circumstance. It is all for sanctions.. if a man conforms to established norms of society, it is because of fear of negative sanctions like penalties.. and if he does not, for values and morality, it is in hope of positive sanction, like rewards or praise. VERY VERY VERY rarely you can say its a selfless act. Isnt this what Plato says about the spiritual part of the soul desiring for honor ? Btw, I picked Republic in 2009 but haven't finished book-I yet That too I read book-I cuz I had to write a project on this but then I chose to write on "On Liberty" - JS Mill. :P WTF ..... No trolling :acute: BosssBhaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiii :girl_hide: Shivani ka account hacked :hmmm: kyaaaaaaaa haiiiii :whack: ^^ :hysterical:
Raghav_12 Posted March 18, 2011 Posted March 18, 2011 Well' date=' I'd argue that just behavior is and has to be rational behaviior, and therefore, the concept of what is just and unjust is a universal truth, and as such, what is Just would hold true no matter what the norms. Law on the other hand, has to do with norms, and not justice, as an end to itself. Enlightened law and justice would be parallel.[/quote'] I fully agree with you on this. Justice is something as innate to human nature as rationaity and closely linked with conscience. It is very frivolous to think that people behave in just manner just because of societal fear or some kind of pressure. Behaving in just manner gives inner satisfaction to humans and if they don't succumb to other temptations, they would always behave in that manner only. Yes, concept of justice is universal truth. Here some posters seem to be equating justice as law, which is not the case actually..
youngindia Posted March 18, 2011 Posted March 18, 2011 YES! We are just because of fear of sanction.. For A just society, there should be people willing to help law enforcement ,people willing to obey laws, people in charge willing to implement laws.One without the other DOES NOT work. A criminal cooks up self serving excuses and delusions for himself. he may overestimate his ability to evade law. they often do! As for a person in poverty, his life is just plain misery. so he has nothing to lose and may well came out of misery with luck. fear of sanction may not work there. when do the rich and powerful fear sanction? In court room its not about what people know, its about "what you can prove"! it presents headache only for the prosecution! Considering all of the above, fear of sanction only deters the weak! As for all these "gossip, slander, resentment, public opinion, sympathy, folkways, mores, customs, religion and morality", there is your assumption they belong to familes without criminal taint or other form of taint you care about reputation only when its good already! people who break laws often do not always come from these backgrounds The problem is not that all people do not have a sense of justice. some people fail to develop a sense of justice (beyond weak levels).whereas other people have developed enough sense of justice ,atleast to the extent of not breaking laws. as for being unjust and not breaking law, there is no lawful punishment anyway.the only solution is to encourage people to develop fairness.
Recommended Posts