Do you think we live in a "just" world?

What goes around comes around, People get what they deserve, or some form of karma?

What do you think and why?

I think its unjust. Many people get away with doing many things. Sometimes people get their comeuppance, and everyone goes on to blame it on Karma, forgetting all the crap that people have got away with.

Nothing seems "equal" & nothing seems "fair" but it might be just...
not my call. The universe is too big for me to make judgements, overall.

Yes and no.

We can make it just. Its the hardest path. Its much easier to just knee jerk reaction and create some more injustice a long the way.

I don't think there is any kind of supernatural tally system in place to manage peoples Karma.

I think the human mind, and the social cognitive system has plenty of memory to track a given persons social net rightness, or wrongness.

People don't tend to let other people get away with it too long without at least making the offender miserable.

Ask that question to a 13 year old Tanzanian child and he will say it is a very unjust world.

I still can cry today thinking of it when I watch how a group of kids fight over a bowl of rice and live on the streets with one of the highest aids epidemics concentrated in the world.

but ask that question to a person living in a comfortable life and most likely they will say it is a just world for one can make it so.

So you will get many opinions on that question.

One thing I know for sure is that it is a mysterious world full of unanswered questions that people have been asking for thousands of years.

One can only speculate and wonder at times.

Yet nevertheless, despite unanswered questions, we have to make the best of what we have. That is the challenge in itself

There are a lot,

Who get away with a lot.

The world mostly rewards integrity.

The world also mostly rewards a lack of integrity.

The moral is that the world rewards action over inaction and industry over sloth.

My reply might seem somewhat cold-hearted. But it's truly the way I feel.

First, death is meaningless.

Why?

Because life is free!

No one can complain about death as being 'unjust' when their very life was given to them freely. How could death be unjust? That doesn't even make any sense at all.

So all that's left to judge is pain and pleasure!

As far as I'm concerned there is only one kind of pain, and that's physical pain. However, as humans, we also consider "emotional pain". Emotional pain is very REAL to us, from our perspective.

However, emotional pain is ultimately nothing more than our own reactions to things. If we love someone and they are hurt or die, we suffer deep emotional pain. But we truly bring that on to ourselves. Some people suffer more emotional pain than others because this kind of "pain" is indeed a matter of personal choice.

For example, say that you have a child, and the child dies. You can take two views. You can accept that the child was a child of the universe and you were very glad to have been a part of that child's life. Praise the universe for having given you the pleasure of knowing the child. Place a flower on the grave, accept the death, and walk away looking toward what does remain alive in the universe.

That may seem cold, but let's face it, it a decision that can be made.

The other ulternative is to never forgive the universe for allowing "your" child to die, and purposefully keep sulking over the child for the rest of your life.

That a descision to chose to wallow in emotional pain or not.

So emotional pain is, in a very real sense, nothing more than our own view of life and what we are willing to accept, and not accept.

So all emotional pain is completely FAIR, because we bring it on ourselves by our own choice. We create our own emotional pain.

Again, some people may see this as being a cold view of life, but I simply see it as being true, I don't judge it to be hot or cold, just the facts.

This brings us to physical pain.

Physical pain appears to be something we truly have no choice about.

This would include hunger, disease, brutal accidents that tear off body limbs or whatever, and any form of physical pain.

Now the question comes, "Is pain just"?

Well, if we're going to ask that question then what about pleasure? Is pleasure "just"?

I think when we come to these questions the next question that instantly comes to mind is, "Do we DESERVE pain, or pleasure?"

Before we can judge something as being "just" we must consider the concept of whether or not it's "deserved".

From the univere's point of view, the universe may simply laugh and say, "Deserve? What's that? You don't DESERVE anything! You just get what you get. Deal with it!"



So I guess in that sense we can say that the world is not "just" because the world isn't based on what we "deserve", and "justice" makes no sense unless somone "deserves" it.

In order for Justice to make sense there needs to be an ultimate Judge. Human's have been trying to create an ultimate Judge since the time of Zeus and probably even long before that.

The Eastern Mystics have created the concept of Karma which takes the place of an egotistical 'Sky-god' judge.

Can Karma be true? Well, if it goes from life to life though reincarnation then YES, absolutely!

When we see a seemingly "innocent" child in seemingly harsh conditions, Karma has the answer! They aren't nearly as "innocent" as they appear! That PERSON that appears to be an innocent CHILD, actually came into this world bringing with them their KARMA.

We look at an seemingly innocent child and think, "How unfair", but maybe that Child was Aldoph Hitler the last time around, or some other war criminal, or very nasty person.

The apparent 'innocence' of the child is a illusion because we can't see the BIGGER PICTURE.

Karma potentially has the ability to make this world JUST.

I personally have huge problems with egotistical "Sky-gods" that create humans for the first time at conception and judge them based on this life along. That view of reality is far too riddled with insurmountable problems for me personally.

So Karma can indeed make the world JUST. Am egotistical judgmental "sky-god" that creates souls at birth fails miserably.

Or life could be a complete accident in which case the very concept of justice is a moot point.

My vote goes out for Karma.

consequences always exist ... even if the victims of some asshole's bad karma aren't around to see the payback.... the consequences come.

The term 'just' does not apply to a purely material existence such as the universe.



Anthropomorphizing leads to wrongful paths to nowhere.

*** The nature of the world is a matter of your point of view! ***

Explaining the world's justice (or injustice) from the point of view of Karma, is to navigate into the murky waters of Fate -- since nobody dare claiming to be an expert in either one...

(from the point of view of Karma -- which might span a few generations -- a poor child's ancestors might've been vicious killers...(Hitler?) There are too many unknowns to even begin to consider!

***However, the truth of the matter is within us:
if we beleive the world is just, then it will confirm itself as such. But if we believe it is unjust, then I fear for our well-being!
The reason there is so much injustice in the world is because some people believe they're more "just" than others!..

Well, I'm impressed, of course I expected the most intelligent responses from the Sci & Phil commentators.

Most poeple that hold religious beliefs believe we live in a just world. I think they have to in order to uphold thier beliefs.

So let me continue with a train of thought that I think Bushido...
sorta alluded to.

If you are wronged or someone you love is wronged and there is no 'other force' which doles out 'just' rewards - are we 'justified' in exacting revenge?

The answer to that lies within one's own personal sense of ought.

Why the morality aspect Di?

I agree. Only a system where conscious beings all vi for resources can the concept of fairness exist.


I think so.

To me fair is fair. If someone wrongs you, what would be fair would be to reciprocate that exactly. Now the question is would that be just.


Is fairness not the same as Justice?
I really don't think they are synonymous.

I think its fair that I get to kill and torture someone who killed and tortured one of my best friends. Do I think its just . . . no.

Hi Creative - hope you are doing well.

Well, I just got to thinking about why people might accept the 'just world' idea. I'll write my train of thought here, but first something Bushi said:



It certainly isn't 'fair' when LIFE exacts a toll on someone. But those who are religious, seem to prefer to ignore the question of fairness and instead proclaim that god has a plan or that god knows best and so on. So in this sense, what Bushi says is correct, fairness and justice are not the same thing.

So let's examine the 'just world' theory from the perspective that an individual or a group of individuals are or have, in some way, brought about harm to another.

NOW - those who believe in a 'just world' believe that these people will end up suffering, in some way, for the injustice they caused.

So I got to thinking, why then would people who believe the world is a just place think that we have a right to exact a toll on another? Wouldn't nature keep justice in the world?

Taking it further, I began to wonder - if all those people who believe we live in a just world, do they think all the people starving, sick, living in poverty all DESERVE this - like justice being served?

Then I thought about the religious poeple that belive their god is the final justice. Will that god balance the scales by saying all those who suffered extreme poverty, starvation and unfair illness will be the fist into heaven and those who thought more about thier own wellfare than these poor wretches will surely be overlooked.

I mean think about it, if a missionary goes to feed the hungry, and nurse the sick for the purpose of bringing their religion to those people, do they think they are serving 'justice'?

And what about plain old bigotry, prejudice and the act of discrimination? Will those who believe it's a just world, simply ignore it - if it doesn't concern them?

I suppose this would have been better in the general religion forum, but I thought it seemed more like a philosophy.

So anyway, am I wrong to think the just world theory is for those who only want justice for themselves?

I'll be gone for a few days. But I'll check to see if anyone responded.
Thanks
Red

I find this a rather interesting question, especially with respect to the supposed words of Jesus written by Matthew:

Jesus supposedly said, "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

This very proclamation does indeed imply that Heaven will be a hierarchical society. There will be upper, lower, and middle-class citizens in heaven based on how many commandments they broke on Earth evidentally. How else could someone be the 'least' in heaven or 'great' in heaven?

So heaven will be just as screwed up as life on Earth evidently. It certainly won't be "perfect" if it contains a hierarchial society of less than holy souls.

Does this mean that Jesus' forgivenss will be "incomplete"?

Obviously it must.

I think Christians are under the erroneous belief that Jesus will have forgiven all their sins, but here we have Matthew claiming that Jesus is saying that many people who get into heaven will not be forgiven completely and will indeed be considered to be the least in heaven.

So Jesus' forgivenss cannot be complete. Salavation cannot be obtained in whole, only in part, thus we have been giving this in Jesus' own words, according to the gospel of Matthew.

Heaven will be a heirarchy of semi-forgiven souls. I guess there shall be no forgiveness then for all the rest of eternity.

Interersting indeed.

This kind of flies in the face of the idea that Jesus' forgives sins does it not? Evidently he intends on keeping track of their sins in heaven forever and never forgiving them completely. They shall forever be the least in heaven.

Kind of an eye-opener isn't it? I mean relative to what Christianity normally teaches about Jesus forgiving all your sins?

Where do they get this stuff anyway? Clearly they didn't get it from the Bible because here we have Jesus himself saying otherwise, according to Matthew.

Why is it that what the religion generally teaches never seems to match up with what Jesus is actually recorded as having said in the Bible?

Di...



I am ok - surviving as it were. I hope the same for you, my friend.

Concerning the OP...

The conceptual understanding of justice in religious circles involves a sense of fairness. It has been said that revenge is for 'God', not man. This could have several different affects on a believer who feels that they have been done wrong. Ultimately it allows one to not live with negativity in their thoughts, as long as they believe that they do not have to concern themselves with revenge.

I feel that way, but not because I place faith in this religious point of view.

I have found that thoughts of revenge consumes the light-hearted nature within myself. Something just feels wrong about intentionally, deliberately, and purposefully bringing harm to another for the goal of harming the other. That is what I call revenge.

Hi D! Long time no see!

No - we are never 'justified' in exacting revenge. My writing here is hypocritical, as I've often confused my own view of 'harms against me' with a larger idea of 'justice in the world', but anytime we want to do wrong against another, we are wanting to do wrong against another, regardless of what they've done or why we want revenge. If we ever find ourselves (as I have) thinking "this would be justified by the wrong they have done" then we on the path of indulging our selfishness and embracing lies to convince ourselves its okay.

This is different, though, then trying to protect people from future harm, or trying to shape a person or groups decision by introducing a fear of consequences. I mean, if you're thinking of doing some kind of harm to someone in order to convince them its not worth their effort to harm you in the future, to me thats a different thing that trying to say you are 'justified' in harming someone just because they have harmed you in the past. I'm not saying the former is right, just admitting that they are different.

Because it would never work as a religion in the modern age to adhere to closely to the bible.



Now this is an interesting distinction.

We can be justified in the same behavior as long as the reasons are sound.

I kill a man who is a killer and about to kill an innocent again, or may kill an innocent later . . . if this is justified then this is not revenge? Or could it be both?

Well Hi Everyone,

Lots of interesting comments. Abra you have really supported the idea of a "class" or maybe it's actually a "caste" system in the Christian version of heaven. But they aren't the only ones - the Mormons believe in the caste system of heaven as their status there depends on the gender (only males actually receive status) and on the number of wifes, children and family they have baptized.

So I find it interesting that so many religious people believe we live in a "just world".

Creative, I do understand what you are saying about the purpose that's served by such a belief, but there are so many examples in real life that expose the 'just world belief' as a rediculous falicy that it's hard to beleive anyone would buy it.

My son had a tough time when we first moved here, getting bullied and made fun of. I helped him though it by telling him to be patient and he might just see the bully getting paid back in kind by some of life's misfortune. It really worked and, as a young man, he does not seek revenge, but knows that everyone 'suffers' and how we react to the misfortunes in life, at least in some part,determine how bad the misfortune is interpreted by us.

Hi Message - it has been a while, thanks for stopping in. I agree with Bushi, you have brought up a very interesting spin on the topic.

So let me ask you, does this also pertain to putting people in prison? Is that revenge, 'just' punishment, or a way to prohibit future harm (even if just for a while?)

Bushi, in responce to Message, you question,Good questions.

This is exactly the kind of 'set-up' that is based on the faulty logic that proclaims a just world. For example, a persuasive leader may be able to get others to murder, but do we kill the leader or those who do the leaders bidding, or do we kill anyone 'infected' by the propaganda of the regime? Are we then being the tool through which this just world operates or are we punishing, exacting revenge, or protecting innocent poeple? But then there is the question, who are the innocent?