Does absolute justice exist or not? This essay will present arguments for the existence of absolute justice. Many people disagree that absolute justice exists. Thus they argue that justice cannot be derived from nature since contradictory and different forms of justice exist in nature; and one cannot derive the greater and perfect from the lesser and imperfect, also they argue that the idea of absolute justice is the ideas of different cultures and times. That is why the idea of justice varies greatly from one culture to the next. The argument used to disprove the above statements will stem from the relationship of order to justice. The next paragraphs will present the arguments above.
Culture and philosophy have always gone hand in hand. A person who lived in the Middle Ages thought it to be perfectly just to cut off the hand of a thief. In "modern times" we consider ourselves more "civilized", and put people in jail or fine them for stealing. As time and culture changed, so does philosophy. Thus any person of sense will see that justice cannot be absolute since it changed with the times. Each culture has developed a different idea of perfect justices to meet their own individual needs.
Since more then one form of absolute or perfect justice cannot exist, thus absolute justice does not exist. Rather for each individual society justice is like beauty that it is in the eye of the beholder. Here presented the other case against absolute justice. Their arguments made that absolute justice can be derived from nature.
Without questions nature holds a system of justice. However natural justice or rather the law of the jungle is another words justice that is in the interest of the stronger. That is obviously an imperfect justice, for the just and correct are not always the stronger. Or justice is perhaps helping friends and harming enemies, like a group of animals that cannot hunt on their own.
Thus we see many different forms of justice in nature. Certainly justice cannot have different definitions. For instance if justice is in the interests of the stronger it cannot be helping friends and harming the enemies. (E. g.
if ones friend is ones enemy, than one is helping ones enemy while the other is acting in their own interest even if it means your demise. ) Not to mention that these forms of justice are of a lesser and inferior origin than the absolute justice. One from the lesser and inferior cannot derive the greater and perfect, only vis versa. Example: if one says that it is raining in Chelsea it does not mean that it is raining everywhere in the world. The simple existence of a lesser justice does not in any manner prove the existence of a greater or absolute justice. To disprove both of these arguments separately would require a lengthy discussion each piece.
Rather an attempt will be made here to summarize both arguments without making them look like a red herring. 1. Since there are many different forms of justice found in nature and society there couldn't be only one form of justice. 2. one cannot prove the greater from the lesser justice. Starting first with point one that justice changes with culture and times.
This argument shall be subdivided into two parts a) justice of nature b) justice of humanity. The latter shall be argued first. Each society has its own representation of ideal justice. Indeed justice has changed greatly with times and cultures. However just because a society has envisions of different form of justice does not mean that absolute justice does not exist. Absolute justice may be like a pearl at the bottom of the ocean yet to be discovered.
Now that the realm of possibility is open again one may safely argue for absolute justice. Nature has a lot of different examples of justice that it gives one. However, first a seemingly unrelated discussion on order in nature. Order manifests itself on all parts of nature. Look at a wall on an atomic level and it seems to be a bunch of randomly moving particles.
If one were to return back to the original level of observation from where you can see that each atom plays an important in the whole. The movement of each atom gives the wall critical properties that it needs to serve its function; such as heat, drink and so on. if one were to say that 'justice is not being done to a painting we can assume that the owner will try to change the order of things to make room for the suitable painting. Thus justice and order are intertwined. Thus where ever one will find order, one will find justice. the basic and most primitive order in nature is the food chain.
Thus the animals have exactly the type of justice they need to maintain a perfect balance in the food chain. an animal does not need the complex social structure of an animal shelter. The food chain maintains system of justice that is in the interest of the stronger. Other animals that cannot defend them selves and group up to hunt prey are following a system of justice called helping friends & harming enemies.
Now these forms of justice are complementary and contradictory for they are just different shades of gray on the black-white grandniece. This is best meant that one includes the other within it self. For instance animals that are too weak to kill their own prey hunt in groups thus helping friends and harming enemies. In the end all that is done for the food-chain order in nature. If justice contains the previous order within it than it also contains the old justice within it.
Justice therefore in is a gray area from which one can derive the colors that make it up white (absolute justice) black (lack of justice). Thus the more complex the social order of a society the more perfect form of justice is needed. Since the universe is one of the most complex orders it must therefore have justice inherent in its framework.