What do we use to define Justice, when the definer is a morally imperfect person as well?

Answer 1

Justice is that which conforms to the legal requirements, and promotes a sense of responsibility and consequences for one's actions.

We don't need to be morally perfect to have justice. We only need to be willing to look beyond our own prejudices and do what is proper given the big picture.

Answer 2

Justice is an abstract thing that is expressed in the reality when, e.g., one receives what s/he is supposed to receive; when some one receive something that s/he gains according to its needs; when someone don't receive what is supposed to, then we have an expression of what unjustice is.

Justice is what is not unfair. I mean, imagine a vertical line in front of you and put in the right side everything that is unfair (and these things we all know). In the other side, you put all the other ones and then you abstract what justice is, in our times.

In our times, because in the Medieval pretty different than we've today. Wow, pretty different.

Try to know what justice is for the medievals and you'll like it!

Ah, the difiner is always a morally imperfect person; but is does not imply that we can not objectivly define that... These are two different and independent things.


Ie - B r a z i l

Answer 3

Rely on common sense and the laws of a society that practices equal justice and mercy.

Answer 4

it's all revenue and it sucks but the immoral and immoral work together. that's the good guys and the bad guys. and the bad guys are back on the streets to revenue more money for the justice system.

Answer 5

A great philosophical arguement if I have ever heard one... ping pong it for a while and hit me back with the score....

Answer 6

MISCARRIAGE