Let's apply this to real life. I'm innocent, so if you kill me, then it's murder. My brother avenges me by killing you, so it's justice. Then your brother kills my brother to avenge you. The flaw in Gandhi's quote up there is that my brother would have evened the score, restoring justice. Your brother started a new one by avenging a GUILTY person. What do you think?
2007-03-09 15:04:47 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
The point you make supports what Gandhi said. You take out my eye, I avenge by taking out the eye of your brother, you avenge by taking out the eye of my sister,,,,pretty soon everyone has lost an eye.
The Bible may say an eye for an eye, but vengeance is the Lord's. Anyway, evening the score only leads to more ignorance and hatred, lives lost and wars.
Is that what the world needs?
2007-03-09 15:10:19 · answer #1 · answered by nanlwart 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You are imagining the concept of justice as though it were a scoreboard in some metaphysical football game. In fact, justice is not an objective concept, but is based solely on individual perception. Let me give you an example:
Taking another's life as revenge may be considered "justice" to one party, but an injustice to another party. The bereaved families of both victims suffer as a result of this cycle of aggression. Perhaps the animosity between families brings even more murder. The cycle of death and retribution continues until a responsible party acts as a mediator.
Gandhi's point was that, since we cannot stop injustice from occurring, we must act as responsible human beings; we must contribute a counterbalance to such injustice. Our duty is to act with reason, rather than rage.
2007-03-09 15:18:40 · answer #2 · answered by Mystery Viscera 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
It's only supposed to go one step. If I kill you, then I get killed. I was a bad person, so there's nothing that needs to be avenged.
2007-03-09 15:08:38 · answer #3 · answered by Moral Orel 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's not justice if your brother kills me. Then you would have two people dead. That's what Gandi meant. Your question is what he's talking about.
2007-03-09 15:09:19 · answer #4 · answered by edward 1 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Nope because Gandhi's quote is NOT that your brother would have evened the score, he is saying eye for an eye IS WRONG!!, you went through all that for nothing. Quit analyzing silly quotes.
2007-03-09 15:09:10 · answer #5 · answered by wondering 1 · 2⤊ 3⤋
firstly its never right to kill someone your better off letting them go to jail for life.
if you belive in the bible an eye for an eye was in the old testament, but 2000 yrs ago this was changed.
2007-03-09 15:09:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
well his idea was that he was avenging himself, as you caused the brother greif by killing the man, so he was avenging the pain you caused him.
2007-03-09 15:07:34 · answer #7 · answered by wingends 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why would you be killed in the first place?
2007-03-09 15:07:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Your brother just couldn't let it go, could he????? Ooops! I mean MY brother....that bast**d!
2007-03-09 15:10:34 · answer #9 · answered by 123..WAIT! 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
its not an eye for an eye anymore.
2007-03-09 15:07:22 · answer #10 · answered by CATWOMAN 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋