only possible among equals?
An Inclusive Site Dedicated to Life-Long Learning
Any thoughts worth writing about
On the lookout for more joy
Observations and reflectionsf
You - philosophical, thoughtful, witty. Me - still thinks fart jokes are funny. We should DEFINITELY get together!
Questioning the conventional wisdom
Everything random... At 3am 😊
These are unedited versions of my thoughts straight from the mind, a relieve from the ‘pressure cooker’, snippets and flotsam of a mundane existence, collected over time, at the early morning hours at sunrise. I have no intensions to start a self-help group or a forum for complains!
Blossoming: A Story of Beauty, Pain, Struggle & Growth
The African Environmental Blog site
The world inside my head is beautiful 🌷🌷
Videos of feral cats on the streets, and my own four feral felines at home, feline humor, advice, and gifts for your cat.
My journey to finding love through the sea Fuckboys
A blog by the Global Governance Centre, Graduate Institute, Geneva
Nicole
Cogito Ergo Sum
Sustainable Living & Wildlife Conservation
Where The Eagles Fly . . . . Art Science Poetry Music & Ideas
One minute info blogs escaping the faith trap
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t…
Mark and Abbie Jury
Life is intuition woven on fickleness.
Life is a journey. Let us meet at the intersection and share a story.
Random musings about everything.
With(out) Predicates
I call architecture frozen music. – Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Maybe. It might however more important to have truly great men and women who are able to inspire others to live justice.
LikeLike
I agree that education that leads to a change of heart could help, but how effective is the question.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If so, how does the little man, the disenfranchised, receive justice?
LikeLike
Does he ever receive justice? That is the question.
LikeLike
Ahhhh, tis the question. What is “real” justice?
LikeLike
Now John, you have spoiled the fun. I have to go back to my philosophy teacher.
By answering your question, we will arrive at whether justice is possible.
A while back, I wrote all we desire and call justice, is in my view, seeking to revenge. Either we do it our own way, or we defer it to another to act on our behalf.
LikeLike
Spot on, Justice = Revenge. Good Justice = Satisfactory Revenge.
LikeLike
That is more like it!
LikeLike
John, this is a great point — question.
“Systems of justice… for example, can be regarded as the successful transformation of a deep-seated urge for revenge – euphemized as retribution – which keeps the urge within acceptable boundaries.”
Frans De Waal, Good Natured, p. 194
LikeLike
“keeps the urge within acceptable boundaries”
I think that nails it perfectly.
LikeLike
Revenge and Justice Among Primates
“Chimpanzees, our closest genetic cousins, are a highly sociable species with a well-developed system of reciprocity. Reciprocal relations probably developed out of the need for food sharing in a species dependent upon food exchange, especially in support of pregnant and nursing females and young offspring.
Retaliation for breaches in reciprocity became an integral part of the chimpanzee social system and out of this grew a “system of revenge” according to the noted primatologist, Frans de Waal (1996). Reciprocal altruism is an idea first developed by Robert Trivers in the early 1970’s. It is a complex mechanism based on the remembrance of favors given and received, allowing the development of cooperative networks that expand beyond kinship ties.
As de Waal points out, “the Golden Rule was made by creatures who began following the reciprocity rule, ‘do as the other did, and expect the other to do as you did’” (p. 136). The first hints of moral obligation and indebtedness are already recognizable among primates. But Trivers also recognized that a reciprocal relationship would only last as long as there was no cheating.
Cheating – taking more than one gives – undermines the system of cooperation and can threaten everyone in a complex, interactive social system. The only way to protect against this is to make cheating costly, an outcome leading to the evolution of punishment.” Source
LikeLike
Perfect!
LikeLike
Very interesting
LikeLike
How would you define the term “equals”. Seeing someone as fully human?
LikeLike
Interesting questions there Victoria.
Between a rich man and a poor man, is justice possible, as a manner of example?
LikeLike
Not if it’s the rich man making the decisions for the poor man.
LikeLike
Are there times when the poor man makes decision for the rich man?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oops, not sure how that happened, but my comment below “only when they revolt” was intended to be posted under your last reply to me.
LikeLike
In pre-colonial Kenya, did you not have systems of justice that served everyone? I’m thinking of the elders’ councils where everyone had the right to have their say. The wrongdoer paid compensation in cattle or goats for whatever crime they had committed, from killing someone downwards. I seem to remember that the Meru, in particular, had a highly developed legal system. In pre-colonial systems it was all about restoring the natural order of things; any wrongdoing affected the whole community, and so there was communal impetus to see that justice prevailed. This notion is totally at odds with the capitalist concept of justice whereby only someone with money can have their case heard, and how far they are fairly represented is also often directly related to how far they can afford the best lawyer.
LikeLike
I have read about the council of elders and there roles and now the office of the chief justice encourages people where possible to use other means of arbitration other than courts.
LikeLike
Well that’s a turn up, Noel.
LikeLike
Perhaps this would be possible and true in a perfect world. In reality, is justice ever served? I think not. I hope you are enjoying your weekend, my Nairobi brother!
LikeLike
Well, that is a very important point. Is there ever any justice?
I am having a good time.
Hugs my friend and brother
LikeLike
Only when they revolt.
LikeLike
Is there justice during a revolt or upheaval?
Can we say Gaddaffi or Mubarak received justice?
LikeLike
Noel, I come from a completely different angle when it comes to applying justice. IMO, neither Gaddaffii or Mubarak received justice. I don’t believe in an eye for an eye. That is not justice.
LikeLike
On that we are in total agreement.
I guess you must have written something on justice. I can check them out.
LikeLike
Well, I have written many comments regarding justice — that we have it all backwards, and have been doing so for eons due to ignorance of how the environment affects gene expression and brain plasticity.
LikeLike
Are there really equals?
LikeLike
Am not sure there are.
LikeLike
The term ‘equal’ is being used here in different ways.
I think Victoria’s suggestion that justice has to be linked to social reciprocity is bang on so I’m not going to suggest that ‘justice’ is another term that needs to better defined for the purpose of addressing the question.
But ‘equality’ assumed to be synonymous with whatever constitutes equals is a loaded assertion because there are various kinds of equality when used in the same social sense as ‘justice’ (rather than a direct comparison of ‘sameness’ with another individual).
I think one can have justice without equality as long as the same condition is met for social reciprocity. For example, a small fine for breaking a rule – such as a parking infraction – may have no consequence to the rich person but a serious blow to a poorer one. Justice – in the sense of social reciprocity (no one can park in this place) – is not served unless there is the same element of reciprocity of effect. A small fine for the poor person has the same effect only if the size of the fine produces the same social consequence for the wealthier person. Equality in this sense means an unequal punishment! Justice is only served if there is inequality… to produce equality of effect.
LikeLike
There is this dialogue in Sophie’s world
What are your thoughts?
I have no disagreements with your explanation on social reciprocity.
LikeLike
Following that thought to its logical conclusion, if a man is to be tried by a jury of his peers, shouldn’t a man accused of murder be tried by a jury of murderers –?
LikeLike
parliamentary commissions are the closes to such a jury, especially when they investigate their follows for diverting public funds, they hardly ever find them guilty of any wrongdoing.
LikeLike
This question makes me sad, because my own experiences have impressed me to believe that there is no justice without money. But I would like to be argued out of this belief, because it’s so cynical.
Also, another problem with justice, is that everyone has their own definition of what that is exactly – and that definition is shaped by their personal belief system, or, as Robert Anton Wilson likes to call it, “BS”.
Peace to you, Noel!
LikeLike
Peace to you my good friend.
I think the bigger question is to define what we think justice is and see if it achievable for all.
Cynicism is not bad anyway.
LikeLike
Justice may always be imperfect. The first step lies in defining it.
LikeLike
And that is the crux of the matter. Maybe the question should have been what is justice and thereafter we would ask when is it possible
LikeLike
NO! Defintely not!
LikeLike
That is a strong objection
LikeLike
I think you know me alittle 🙂
LikeLike
Live in a way that you seem to be the standard you would like others to be held to and hope it catches on- somewhere between Nietzsche and ghandi and all is good 🙂
LikeLike
Halfway between Gandhi and Nietzsche would be quite some work.
Thanks for reading and for your comment.
LikeLike