Morality vs Justice

Hi everyone.

For the first time in a long time i am posing a question to the forum. I have been reading this recently in the lead up to my return to university. The reason i send you here is that there is a free edition on the site from september 2008 that you can d/l in pdf the title question of which is 'what is law'. One of the articles is law vs justice, but he also toys very very briefly with morality vs justice. He basically says about half way through that justice and morality are invariably tied.

I personally don't agree. Unfortunately, while trying to put my argument into words i got stuck. It is really really hard to articulate this particular argument because in most situations they are linked. However i think that our concept of justice and our concept of morallity, and i am talking about common concepts of the two and not dictionary definitions of possible concepts, are not necessarily invariably linked. They certainly aren't mutually exclusive but there are situations that are conceivable where a moral action can be construed as unjust and a just action is morally reprehensible.

The thought process that i was following was that state endorsed executions or capital punishment can be seen as justice and also as imoral. But then i was talking to someone at work and they said that although they see nothing morally wrong with it, it doesn't necessarily mean that it is just as you can't ever be 100% sure of someones guilt.

I don't recommend that you read the article unless you really really want to, it is filled with jargon and is quite hard going. It sent me to dictionary.com about 5 times for various words. Its a good read tho if you can slog through it all.

The question i am posing for debate is can morality be seperated from justice?

I will add a rider. This is a secular argument, please leave your religion at the door. I don't mind arguments from christian moral values, that's fine since i live by that code of conduct as well, but no arguments that invoke the bible please.

Now dance puppets, dance.

Sick wicked post there, brother. Way to bring back the GC. Hopefully it sparks some interesting discussion.

[ADD ON] Wait, you're going back to Uni? Cool. Doing what? and when?

Tom, there has been a void in my life since the death of Phil Hartman.
You can help fill part of that void by allowing me to call you Lionel Hutz (or Mr. Hutz if you prefer).

I think that counts as interesting discussion Andy although it probably wasn't what you were after.

Not exactly, Trev. But I forgive you.

Trev wrote:However i think that our concept of justice and our concept of morallity, and i am talking about common concepts of the two and not dictionary definitions of possible concepts, are not necessarily invariably linked.

I think I can see where you’re coming from. How about this one: some people may say that to ‘turn the other cheek’ would be the “moral” thing to do, while it may not be the “just” thing to do. So I think that might support what you’re saying. Although, that would depend on how someone defines those two concepts.

Which leads me to ask, how would you define “justice”? I’m sure it’s difficult. My intuitive (and therefore naive) idea of justice seems to entail the notion of ‘equality,’ or ‘fairness,’ but those ideas automatically, in my mind, imply some type of ‘retribution’ or ‘vengeance.’ And, so, when I think about it just now, I must agree with you that those particular things just mentioned aren’t, at all, linked with “morality”.

My concept of justice, in this arena, would definitely say that it is vengeance orientated. That the punishment meted out is weighted evenly against the transgretion and also against the felon's character and past history. A 'just' act may not be punishment orientated however the concept of Justice is definitely about punishment.

Look at the blind lady justice. That is a great way to visualise and personify what most people think about justice. That justice is blind and weighs all things equally and without prejudice. And because it is blind does it truly have to be moral?

Too deep for me right now...

"Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you take it."

You mean apart from all those slaves that were given freedom during the American Civil War or the English Abolitionist Movement?

I'm just quoting Malcom X here. Ask him. And no.

Actually they were given freedom from slavery, not freedom per se. No peoples have ever been given freedom, if you are talking about freedom in the unlimited sense as opposed to freedom from a certain kind of oppression. The blacks of america were given freedom from slavery, but not from oppression, they weren't given the freedom of citizenship or of advocacy. They were basically turned loose without any money, food or homes and told that they were 'free'. It was until they showed the force of will as a people that they attained freedom of open expression and intellectual achievment, and it wasn't until then that they were considered equals and by their white peers. If they weren't considered equal by the powerful majority then they had not achieved the measure of equality in their society for them to be considered free.

Please, argue against me, that was an oppinion not a stated fact.

Way to kill my buzz Tom

It's what i do.. apparently.

And one for you:


[URL=http://g.imageshack.us/img228/buzzkilluq1.jpg/1/][IMG]http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/buzzkillu