More Subjects
[Name of the Writer]
[Name of Instructor]
[Subject]
[Date]
What is justice?
Introduction
The word justice is derived from a Greek word, “just” having several senses such as “right” in English. Justice is defined as a stance of “being right”, “choosing right” or favoring “deserved”. There are a number of concepts that are associated with justice, starting from right of law to an individual perspective that reflects human and individual power of decision making. (Pater, et, al. 2019). In a simplified form, there are several paradigms of justice, adhering to a code of conduct that is already formulated, leading to an individual’s point of view. There are several philosophers and theologians who have tried to define justice in terms of their understanding of world. It would not be wrong to say that justice refers to one, who is observant of duty or custom, honest, lawful and legally right.
Discussion
Plato, one of the greatest philosophers has defined, “Justice” as a “stance of morality”. According to his writing, Republic, justice is derived from “Dikaisyne” that is much similar to righteousness. In a simplified form, justice refers to “duty of man”. He included fields of human conduct in justice, as long as they can affect others. (Neely, et, al. 2019, pp. 139). It is significant to note that Plato’s definition of justice is a reflection of democratic government that punished Socrates. Being a student of Socrates, Plato used his knowledge as a concept of defense for Socrates. Plato is of view, justice is actually the quality of soul that restricts a man from irrational action and desires that may prove to be selfish. It is asserted that Plato's justice was assigned to save Athens. In contrast, I think justice has nothing to do with past, taking into account that a state or lawmaking body can never be rational. For me, justice is the stance of “righteousness”, taking into account that laws are equally applicable and affirmative. There is no entity who could challenge “law” and “its implication”, because justice is neutrality of decision. Believing in neutrality, justice is something abstract, it could not be achieved because there is no realistic ground of lack of biases in present time
. Plato justified, justice is an impression that could lay down the formation of “Ideal Society”. The great philosopher then defined ideal society as a society where righteousness is reigned as supreme, referring to the cure of all evils. Plato defined justice in terms of its opposite, “injustice” or cruelty that is actually a baseline of all social evil. Although defining justice clarifies the characteristics of an ideal society but it confused the broader perspective where situations and things are never ideal. In the complexities of modernistic and materialistic world, there is a great obsession of power because peaceful attire never means everything is fine. (Adams, et, al. 2018, pp. 1-3). It would not be wrong to say that there is a great conflict between Plato’s idea of justice and my perspective because there is a much deviation in past and present. Today, there is no tunnel that could lead to the worries and tribulations of real victim, taking into account that actual victim is so tormented that his views cannot be brought to public hearings and the ones with authority are using their resources in fact manipulating them. In a simplified form, my definition of justice is a stance that could allow everyone to express what they feel, narrate what they heard and achieve what they strive for, taking into account that it is more like a dream that cannot be turned into a reality. (Pater, et, al. 2019).
I believe in the ideology of circumstances where reality is what that can be analyzed and seen being practiced. It is significant to note that justice refers to the stance of being just and it is none of human attribute because we believe in appearances. Much like Plato, justice can never be related to political authorities because they are meant to make laws that can never be wrong, taking into account that Plato defined justice in terms of clashes and unsatisfactory action he saw in democratic system of that time. I think Plato’s account of justice is notwithstanding scrutiny because Socrates was more like a rebel who questioned the prevalent rules and it is evident that none of the states could bear interference. (Pater, et, al. 2019). Although Socrates was also justified, still I think Plato has not done justice with "justice" because his definition of justice is based on morality where morality would never allow questioning the authorities who have made certain laws unless they are evidently ineffective. Side by side, Plato’s definition reflects morality without staying enacted to it because it infers a deep insight into the actual social happening that could bring forth the devastated and neglected. In contrast to Plato, my understanding of justice is based on the code of conduct that could be vigilant enough to hear the unheard and act without being selfish. (Adams, et, al. 2018, pp. 1-3).
Conclusion
Justice refers to a paradigm where "humanity and morality" come first. It is an attribute that positions man above all other beings in this world, taking into account that it is not seemingly possible. Although Plato tried his best to define justice, his understanding was the product of social setting and a mindset which was whelmed by the death of his teacher. In contrast, my definition of justice is an abstraction because justice is not behooved to achievement; it is just an impression of which lawmaking bodies strive for.
Work Cited
Adams, Matthew. "Virtue and law in Plato and beyond." (2018): 1-3.
Neely, Sol. "Midrash and Social Justice." New Directions in Jewish American and Holocaust Literatures: Reading and Teaching (2019): 139.
Pater, Walter. Plato and Platonism. BoD–Books on Demand, 2019.
More Subjects
Join our mailing list
© All Rights Reserved 2024