Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

justice!!!! what is justice this question time and again hunt us. Do we really know what justice means, or we just pretend. Do we really want to know what justice means or we just get the notion that justice is that which comes in our favour. For many of us Justice is ‘self fulfilling prophrcy’. Neither we want to know about it nor we accpt it. for us justice is what we think and what suits to us or what stisfies us….

In this context I am presenting some dialogues here, which  shows the common thinking about justice..

These are the dialogues between Mater and his humnely disciple;

Moments before Master and his disciple were attacked, discussed a premonition of the attack:

Disciple: Will it be today?

Master: I think so, my son. Are you afraid?

Disciple: Oh, no. Not if we have time to fight. All I want is the chance to strike a few blows first; so I shan’t have done nothing but receive them all my life. If I can kill one Norman first—just one, I don’t want much—one for one, that will seem fair and right enough to me.

Master: (With a kindly smile) Are you so very set on killing one?

Disciple: One for one. After that I don’t much care if I am just a grain of sand in the machine. Because I know that by putting more and more grains of sand in the machine, one day it will come grinding to a stop.

Master: (Gently) And on that day, what then?

Disciple: We’ll set a fine, new, well-oiled machine in the place of the old one and this time we’ll put the them into it instead.

That’s what justice means, isn’t it?

Master: (Smiles and does not answer).

But justice doesn’t mean that, Justice means healing, and reconciling, and showing mercy even though the other person have shown none.” But the discomforting truth is that in our world justice does indeed mean what the disciple thinks it means. It is indeed just that a wrongdoer be punished. And that being so, striking back at the oppressor. and the oppressor’s due. This becomes the vicious cycle one killing the other, all in the name of justice. One might wish there were more to justice than the scale.

 

To invoke justice is the same thing as banging on the table: an emotional expression which turns one’s demand into an absolute postulate . . . . It is impossible to have a rational discussion with a man who mobilizes “justice,” because he says nothing that can be argued for or against. His words are persuasion, not argument. The ideology of justice leads to implacability and conflict, since on the one hand it incites to the belief that one’s demand is not merely the expression of a certain interest in conflict with opposing interests, but that it possesses a higher, absolute validity; and on the other hand it precludes all rational argument and discussion of a settlement.

 

 

As Schopenhauer says:

The difference between the inflicter of suffering and he who must endure it is only phenomenon, and does not concern the thing-in-itself which is the will that lives in both. Deceived by the knowledge bound to its service, the will here fails to recognize itself; seeking enhanced well-being in one of its phenomena, it produces great suffering in another. Thus in the fierceness and intensity of its desire it buries its teeth in its own flesh, not knowing that it always injures only itself, revealing  in this form through the medium of individuation the conflict with itself which it bears in its inner nature. Tormentor and tormented are one. The former is mistaken in thinking that he does not share the torment, the latter in thinking he does not share the guilt