Is there objectivity in Justice?

Answer 1

There is supposed to be, that is why the statue outside the court, holding the scales is blindfolded. That is what it symbolizes.

Answer 2

No, because "just" is a value judgment.

If there were some objective source of knowledge about what is just, justice could be objective. If you take the law to be virtually true -- if you figure its purpose is to stand in for objective knowledge about what's just -- justice can be objective in a smaller way. But then you still run into problems having to interpret the law, which involves making value judgments.

Answer 3

I have come to find that everything in this world is subjective.
Subjective- taking place within the mind and modified by individual bias; "a subjective judgment"
Objective- undistorted by emotion or personal bias; based on observable phenomena. So when cops do racial profiling or African Americans are always the suspects. How is that objective? I don't think justice could be objective. Read the definitions and realize that everything is subjective!

Answer 4

Everyone has different objectives. Just look at The Republic. The characters give a lot of definitions for that word.

Answer 5

Justice is supposed to be about objectivity. Unfortunately, for many people it has become a synonym for revenge - as in "an eye for an eye". Pity.

Answer 6

justice is a concept created by us for our own emotional satisfaction. Its inherently subjective. we steal from the thieves and kill the killers and thats how we concieve of justice.

Answer 7

Sweet Jebus no.

If you have the law, argue the law.
If you have the facts, argue the facts.
If you have neither, just keep arguing.

Court is a legal coin toss, nothing more.