Justice... how would you see this?

Dragatus you win.

This makes me think of that psychology test about this woman who cheats on her husband on the other side of the river, and when she tries to come back because her husband is about to come back home (he travels too much hence why she cheats), there is an insane killer on the bridge. The lover doesn't want to give her the money to pay for the boat travel, the captain of the boat doesn't want her on board for free (it's not a boat cut ally it's one guy who carries people on his shoulders but can't find the term in English), and so she gets killed by the guy. Who is responsible ? The killer is insane, so he can't be responsible... Etc etc.

You can't just go all like "I'd get revenge lol lol lol 11!!!1!1!", you actually have to make a proper philosophical thinking. Hence dragatus win.

Eye got it right. Dragatus is a dreamer. I like what he's saying, but it ain't gonna happen. It's utopia.

Claudia, I'm on the verge of saying "I wish your kids got shot." But I won't. I don't wish that on anyone. And you know what? I won't insult you either. And you know why.

Jad.3 wrote:

Eye got it right. Dragatus is a dreamer. I like what he's saying, but it ain't gonna happen. It's utopia.

Well yes. I described what would be the right thing to do, not the most likely outcome. I'm just saying that swindling the swindler is revenge, not justice.

I agree with Jad.3... It's utopia.. same with all those "model citizen" tards on youtube or other forums.. i just can't stand how they all say "you can#t do that" but in reality they are the same as the one the criticize..

Dragatus wrote:

I'm just saying that swindling the swindler is revenge, not justice.

And what is just if Justice can't reach him?
An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, isn't that just?

Jad.3 wrote:

Dragatus wrote:

I'm just saying that swindling the swindler is revenge, not justice.

And what is just if Justice can't reach him?
An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, isn't that just?

No that's barbaric stupid uneducated pulsion behavior. It means you're worth no better than them.

Justice is cold, methodical, it's smarter than an individual's lone behavior.

Claudia wrote:

You can't just go all like "I'd get revenge lol lol lol 11!!!1!1!", you actually have to make a proper philosophical thinking. Hence dragatus win.

I provided you with an ethical theory. Utilitarianism states that the correct course of action is the one that causes the greatest number of happiness for the greatest number of people and the least amount of harm. Technically speaking if you left the swindler to it s/he would hurt hundreds of people until he eventually cocked up. Trust me when I say that can take a very long time since cocking up requires them to first become complacent.

Unfortunately like all things there are flaws putting the swindler in prison is not punishment, it's rehabilitation. But the prison system is flawed in the sense that most see it as the punishment so there is not enough money being spent on it for it to be fit for purpose.

Quote :

Justice is cold, methodical, it's smarter than an individual's lone behavior.

So you argue that a group approach is fairer than an individual? How so? When every single person approaches with their own pre-conceived ideas and prejudices. Justice is no fairer than an individual approach because all approaches are just as flawed as the other. The only reason justice is seen as fair is because it is the legal way to do things. But in fact it's just as unjust as any other approach one might choose to take.

Claudia wrote:

Jad.3 wrote:

Dragatus wrote:

I'm just saying that swindling the swindler is revenge, not justice.

And what is just if Justice can't reach him?
An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, isn't that just?

No that's barbaric stupid uneducated pulsion behavior. It means you're worth no better than them.

Justice is cold, methodical, it's smarter than an individual's lone behavior.

And I am worth a lot when I let the evil go unpunished!
All it takes for evil to triumph... Tsk tsk.
And about the temperature, revenge does have something in common with Gaspacho.

Justice is not about punishment, Jad...

Anyway, stupid topic, stupid idea to discuss political and social points of view in an international forum.. It only creates useless tensions.


Plus, I am French, so I can't be wrong

Now watch me, Zer0, as I won't insult just lol her.

Claudia wrote:

Justice is not about punishment, Jad...

Claudia wrote:

Plus, I am French, so I can't be wrong

My teeth are grating, but Howgh!

Would you call Don Corleone barbaric? Fair man, pillar of the commulity, charitable, friend of many politics and judges... Man caring for his family and community.
And head of the Mafia.
All is important in real world is a front. If you have friends in right places justice will never reach you. I have some friends in legal circles, and usual consideration of a judge giving verdict is not to make wrong people upset. Or how to supplement his income I have first hand experience with our dear court system and belive me Claudia: you can't win against richer/more connected man in court.
Justice? Favor currying I would belive.

Edit: Ah, it come to me a bit too late: "Allow one injury done to you to pass, and you will encourage the commitment of many"

I meant the idea of justice, the concept of justice, not the institution of justice

Claudia wrote:

I meant the idea of justice, the concept of justice, not the institution of justice

Concepts do not exist in the real world. Only people and their doings.

Claudia wrote:

Plus, I am French, so I can't be wrong

Q.E.D.

eye of the divine wrote:

I provided you with an ethical theory. Utilitarianism states that the correct course of action is the one that causes the greatest number of happiness for the greatest number of people and the least amount of harm. Technically speaking if you left the swindler to it s/he would hurt hundreds of people until he eventually cocked up. Trust me when I say that can take a very long time since cocking up requires them to first become complacent.

I agree with the philosophy of utiltarianism. But utilitarianism is about the concept of Good which is again different from the concept of Justice. Justice is about everybody getting what they deserve, good is about benefiting the most people. Often something that is Good will also be Just, but that is not always the case.

In the case we are talking about specifically swinding the swindler is not Justice, but like you said it may be Good (if it prevents the swindler from hurting more people). However, I would prefer to explore all legal possibilities of doing the same thing before resorting to swindling. I would rather to something that is both Good and Just, than something that is only Good, although ultimately I think that Good is more important than Justice.

eye of the divine wrote:

Quote :

Justice is cold, methodical, it's smarter than an individual's lone behavior.

So you argue that a group approach is fairer than an individual? How so? When every single person approaches with their own pre-conceived ideas and prejudices. Justice is no fairer than an individual approach because all approaches are just as flawed as the other. The only reason justice is seen as fair is because it is the legal way to do things. But in fact it's just as unjust as any other approach one might choose to take.

The group aproach averages out the tendencies of individuals. That makes it better than the average individual for finding a course of action that benefits the most people.

Feral wrote:

Claudia wrote:

I meant the idea of justice, the concept of justice, not the institution of justice

Concepts do not exist in the real world. Only people and their doings.

Then why are we even debating? Swindling the swindler defiantely doesn't fall under the institution of justice.

Yes, concepts like Justice and Good don't physically exist. But people act like they existed and that's what makes them important and worth debating.

They are also one of the reasons why you are reading posts on an internet forum instead of living in a jungle like people did 20.000 years ago. A civilization can only survive if on average each member contributes to the common good as much as he gets from society. If people contribute more than they get, the civilization will grow stronger. But if people get more than they contribute back to society as a whole, the civilzation will become exhausted and collapse. Justice (the concept of getting what you deserve) helps to regulate how much each individual gets and that makes it crucial to the survival of civilization.