Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
And what is justice?
A cat caught and killed a mouse. Is that fair? For a cat, yes, she can eat by herself and feed the kittens. Not for the mouse.
Maybe justice is when everyone has everything equally? Not everyone agrees, either. Hard worker and idler, talent and mediocrity equally-what kind of justice is this?
And so-everywhere and in everything. Everyone has their own concept of justice, which may or may not coincide with the concepts of others.
Therefore, we need laws regulating the life of society, so that different “justice” does not fight among themselves.
People will never live according to justice, and for this reason, for example, God was forced to give the Jews the law through Misha: a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life. But for a real believer in Christ, the law is written on the subconscious and he does not need it because he will never do to another what he would not like to do to himself.
Only laws based on LOVE are needed. Love for God and neighbor. Everything follows from them. Those who love God and their neighbor will not do harm to anyone, but will live according to the “Golden Rule”: “In everything, do to people as you want them to do to you…”
You can do without laws. The main thing is who has the gun. It is sometimes better than any law to explain what is good and what is bad. Difficulties arise when everyone has a gun, as well as their own special opinion on justice for each individual case. The number of citizens, after all such clarifications, is steadily decreasing. Unjust people are sent to the other world. And the fair ones win. But the war cannot last indefinitely, we still need to grow bread, build houses, start families. And then there comes a time when armed people come to some kind of agreement that restricts their ability to own weapons, or to establish justice “here and now”, with blood, well, as it should be…in westerns and action movies, this is well reflected… The right to determine justice is transferred to judges, the power to exercise powers is transferred to the security forces, and the rules of peaceful life are introduced into the rank of law for all. And so on – until the next moment in history, when either there are too many citizens, or a protest (against the authorities, judges, laws, injustice, against other citizens and communities, oligarchs, etc.), or a lot of weapons, or both. This is a positive scenario, everyone seems to agree, but they tolerate each other and do not kill each other, because there is a law that they agreed to at the time.�
And it happens that the most just seek power, sometimes even take away all weapons, and force them to live (more often by force) according to their own justice, regardless of the opinion of others. To avoid discrepancies, the standard justice is issued in the form of a law for everyone, with standard examples, and again judges, security forces… And when the dictator of justice leaves our mortal world, there is another redistribution of power. Either a new source of light and justice begins to rule through the already established system, or the old system breaks down in favor of a new one, which will be approved by the next leader, in order to enforce its rules.
Let's start with analogies, because I haven't bullied you yet. So:
Here is a shoemaker who wants to work conscientiously. They follow certain rules and principles that were drilled into them during their training.
Here is a surgeon. He follows the rules of the clinic and various others. What if his patient dies? Who is to blame? Is this criminal negligence, or are the suppliers of surgical supplies to blame, or who?
Here are the drivers who want to drive fairly. For them, there are entire traffic rules that show who and how to overtake, how to get on the main road, why to turn through a double solid, and so on.
Here is a person who is trying to write correctly. Part of his literacy was hammered into him by the rules at school, and part of it was absorbed by him. But if he suddenly doubts how to write the words protagonist, gas-electric, cafeteria, he remembers the rules or uses special search rules.
Even electronics have special algorithms in case of a network access conflict.
Because conflict is not necessarily malicious intent. Often it is from ignorance. And the measures taken are not always a punishment. Laws also prescribe what to do in the event of f-ups and disasters such as floods. When it is necessary not to think, but to follow instructions, and you can only break them if you know exactly why, and if the instructions themselves endanger the lives and health of citizens.