are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Have philosophical discussions about politics, law, and government.
Featured Article: Definition of Freedom - What Freedom Means to Me
kordofany
Posts: 44
Joined: April 9th, 2018, 3:57 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Franz Kafka
Contact:

are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by kordofany » April 22nd, 2018, 11:56 pm

Muslims have a special understanding of justice and the Communists have a special understanding of justice and liberals have a special understanding of justice and even prostitutes and homosexuals have a special understanding of justice... Do not talk to me about justice as a lofty humanitarian message before you determine what kind of justice you mean. And wouldn't it be your choice for any one of them to violate the concepts of the others and this is injustice.... 😕

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 6965
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by Greta » April 23rd, 2018, 1:44 am

If you are always worrying about justice and injustice your life will be a miserable one. Justice largely exists as a happy accidental confluence of opinion and circumstance rather than a regular occurrence. Justice - the law - is relative. All one can do is work with the laws of the land. Governments cannot allow minority groups to dispense their own laws because:

1) this would lead to atrocities in most of citizens' eyes, and

2) would open up many possibilities for exploitation.

So there must be, for instance, no Sharia Law within western societies that operates outside of that jurisdiction's laws. If a person must have the extreme elements of Sharia Law then they must move to a country that embraces it. Imagine a community of western migrants being allowed to behave normally in a Muslim country :lol:

Eduk
Posts: 1616
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by Eduk » April 23rd, 2018, 3:38 am

Kordofany have you tried asking and then listening?
Also I don't understand your last sentence. Why am I choosing someone to violate someone else's concepts? And why is that injustice? Do you have a special understanding of justice?

Londoner
Posts: 1783
Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm

Re: are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by Londoner » April 23rd, 2018, 5:51 am

Greta wrote:
April 23rd, 2018, 1:44 am
So there must be, for instance, no Sharia Law within western societies that operates outside of that jurisdiction's laws. If a person must have the extreme elements of Sharia Law then they must move to a country that embraces it. Imagine a community of western migrants being allowed to behave normally in a Muslim country :lol:
I do not know about 'migrants', but communities of Christians and Jews and other religions were allowed to run their own affairs within Muslims countries until modern times. By contrast, it was the west that believed you should not tolerate religious diversity, not even a divergent sect of Christianity within a Christian country. What has gone wrong now is that Muslim countries have come to resemble Christian ones.

Paradoxically, western multiculturalism copies the traditional Muslim view. Although ultimate authority is with the Sultan (or whoever), provided you obey the laws and pay your taxes, where possible people should be allowed to manage their own affairs according to their own beliefs. So we do allow people to follow Sharia Law, or Jewish law, or Christian law. They cannot be compelled to; if you do not want to accept the authority of a religious court then you don't have to - but justice is about defending individual rights, not forcing a single set of beliefs on people.

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 6965
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by Greta » April 23rd, 2018, 5:40 pm

Londoner wrote:
April 23rd, 2018, 5:51 am
Greta wrote:
April 23rd, 2018, 1:44 am
So there must be, for instance, no Sharia Law within western societies that operates outside of that jurisdiction's laws. If a person must have the extreme elements of Sharia Law then they must move to a country that embraces it. Imagine a community of western migrants being allowed to behave normally in a Muslim country :lol:
I do not know about 'migrants', but communities of Christians and Jews and other religions were allowed to run their own affairs within Muslims countries until modern times. By contrast, it was the west that believed you should not tolerate religious diversity, not even a divergent sect of Christianity within a Christian country. What has gone wrong now is that Muslim countries have come to resemble Christian ones.
Yes, it's wrong for the west to prevent Muslim residents from engaging in punitive bashing and raping of women. How unfair.

Londoner
Posts: 1783
Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm

Re: are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by Londoner » April 24th, 2018, 4:01 am

Greta wrote:
April 23rd, 2018, 5:40 pm

Yes, it's wrong for the west to prevent Muslim residents from engaging in punitive bashing and raping of women. How unfair.
Childish.

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 6965
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by Greta » April 24th, 2018, 6:31 pm

Londoner wrote:
April 24th, 2018, 4:01 am
Greta wrote:
April 23rd, 2018, 5:40 pm

Yes, it's wrong for the west to prevent Muslim residents from engaging in punitive bashing and raping of women. How unfair.
Childish.
No, actually it was sarcastic. Why? Because your reasoning so was enormously flawed, and I am not thrilled with men ignoring the rights of local women and gays in an unreasoned application of multiculturalism. I support multiculturalism generally on the basis of us all being living, feeling beings, but allowing migrants to implement Sharia that transcends local law would be a cruel injustice for existing female and queer citizens and residents.

Londoner
Posts: 1783
Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm

Re: are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by Londoner » April 25th, 2018, 4:36 am

Greta wrote:
April 24th, 2018, 6:31 pm
No, actually it was sarcastic. Why? Because your reasoning so was enormously flawed, and I am not thrilled with men ignoring the rights of local women and gays in an unreasoned application of multiculturalism. I support multiculturalism generally on the basis of us all being living, feeling beings, but allowing migrants to implement Sharia that transcends local law would be a cruel injustice for existing female and queer citizens and residents.
You say my reasoning was 'enormously flawed' but strangely forget to say why. Instead you go straight on to a personal attack in which you accuse me of having opinions that do not appear anywhere in what I wrote, in this thread or anywhere else.

Do I write anywhere that Sharia law should, or does, transcend local law? I write that ' They cannot be compelled to; if you do not want to accept the authority of a religious court then you don't have to'. Nor can the religious court go against common law, as again I made clear: 'Although ultimate authority is with the Sultan (or whoever), provided you obey the laws and pay your taxes...' so since there are laws against rape and assault then everyone has to obey them, irrespective of personal beliefs. On the other hand, if people want to live as Jews, or Christians, or hippies, or Communists they should be allowed to do so. It is not for the state to demand that we do or don't get married, and in what way, or how we dress, or how we make our wills...

You write you support multiculturalism generally, but not an 'unreasoned application'. What that seems to amount to is that you are OK with individual freedom and equality and multiculturalism for people who believe things that you are sympathetic with, but not for those you disagree with or dislike i.e. Muslims. You know that isn't a coherent position, which is why you have to hide it behind sarcastic remarks and straw man arguments.

Eduk
Posts: 1616
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by Eduk » April 25th, 2018, 5:07 am

It is not contradictory to be for freedom with limits.

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 6965
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by Greta » April 25th, 2018, 5:21 pm

Earlier on:
Londoner wrote:
Greta wrote:
April 23rd, 2018, 1:44 am
So there must be, for instance, no Sharia Law within western societies that operates outside of that jurisdiction's laws.
I do not know about 'migrants', but communities of Christians and Jews and other religions were allowed to run their own affairs within Muslims countries until modern times. By contrast, it was the west that believed you should not tolerate religious diversity, not even a divergent sect of Christianity within a Christian country. What has gone wrong now is that Muslim countries have come to resemble Christian ones.
A clear implication that you were disagreeing. After all, what's the point of Sharia Law if it's completely controlled and limited by western laws? Then it's just behaviours within the limits of western laws, which of course is not the issue.

You had the option of simply explaining yourself as you did above if you felt misrepresented instead of the pointless "childish" ad hominem. Personally, I think you missed the qualifier of my post and responded as if my position was anti-multicultural per se rather than, as Eduk mentioned, referring to "freedom with limits".

Londoner
Posts: 1783
Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm

Re: are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by Londoner » April 26th, 2018, 5:18 am

A clear implication that you were disagreeing.
What I was disagreeing with was the comment:
Imagine a community of western migrants being allowed to behave normally in a Muslim country
I pointed out that the Muslim tradition was once exactly that; to allow religious and cultural minorities to run their own affairs. That it was the west that had the tradition of being intolerant of minorities.
After all, what's the point of Sharia Law if it's completely controlled and limited by western laws? Then it's just behaviours within the limits of western laws, which of course is not the issue.
It isn't 'completely controlled' because western laws aren't supposed to be 'completely controlling' of people's behaviour. Not if you are a liberal and a democrat.
You had the option of simply explaining yourself as you did above if you felt misrepresented instead of the pointless "childish" ad hominem. Personally, I think you missed the qualifier of my post and responded as if my position was anti-multicultural per se rather than, as Eduk mentioned, referring to "freedom with limits".
I had explained myself in my original post. If you choose to reply with a 'sarcastic' one-liner that has nothing to do with what I wrote, it is hardly for me to try to explain myself. If you didn't read the original, why would I expect you to read any further explanations?

Eduk
Posts: 1616
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by Eduk » April 26th, 2018, 9:45 am

The 'west' didn't invent intolerance.

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 6965
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by Greta » April 26th, 2018, 5:52 pm

Londoner, if we ignore context and clear implications of disagreement then, yes, what you say makes sense.

The Muslim tradition was a hangover of the Islamic Golden Age a thousand years ago and means little in the face of what Islam became in the 20th century. To associate Islam with tolerance today, despite their ancient and laudable traditional notions of generosity and understanding, is basically an oxymoron, especially for women.

Londoner
Posts: 1783
Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm

Re: are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by Londoner » April 27th, 2018, 5:03 am

I'm pleased we are on better terms.

I think the Muslim tradition was more about a pre-democratic system of government. It is only when governments are elected that ethnic minorities become important - the politicians do the maths and think 'which group is going to end up owning this country?' So I disagree with Eduk, I think that intolerance in that sense is an invention of the west, as a by-product of democracy and 'self-determination'.

So I don't 'associate Islam with tolerance', rather I say it makes no sense to make any links of that type. Like Christians and Hindus and atheists and everyone else, there is no correlation of religion and tolerance. Push the right buttons and a Buddhist will act like a Nazi. While the grandchildren of Nazis have become well-known for their generosity towards refugees.

Eduk
Posts: 1616
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: are you agree ? what exactly justice means?

Post by Eduk » April 27th, 2018, 7:05 am

I was using the word intolerance normatively. You seem to have a special definition that I can't follow Londoner.

Post Reply