Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31

Thread: Logic of the justice of the law

  1. Top | #21
    Contributor Speakpigeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,143
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,805
    Rep Power
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by fast View Post
    Fairness lies in treating like cases alike and unlike cases unlike. A teacher that awards A-students with a star yet provides no star for lesser grade earning students is not treating lesser grade earners unfairly. In this case, not giving an A-student an earned star to a student who earns an ‘A’ is unfair to that student, and awarding a star to a lesser grade earner is unfair to all the students, especially the ‘A’ students.

    If the teacher decides to award a star to a B-student but does so for a different reason (oh say, biggest improvement), then we need to be mindful of my first sentence: fairness has to do with like and unlike cases. In this scenario, there’s a special case (which is greatest improvement vs not greatest improvement). So long as the B student receives the star because of belonging to that case, that is not unfair to other students—even the A-students.

    As to your “like crap” response, the group pertains to all workers. It would be unfair to treat one good. It would be right, but it would be unfair.

    People too closely associate some forms of immoral behavior as being unfair. I’m just saying there is a difference worthy of being mindful of.
    just
    adj. 1. Honorable and fair in one's dealings and actions: a just ruler. See Synonyms at fair.
    just
    adj 1. a. fair or impartial in action or judgement
    just
    adj. 1. guided by reason, justice, and fairness.
    EB

  2. Top | #22
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,148
    Archived
    14,025
    Total Posts
    19,173
    Rep Power
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by Speakpigeon View Post


    just
    adj 1. a. fair or impartial in action or judgement
    just
    adj. 1. guided by reason, justice, and fairness.
    EB
    If every definition were numbered and we spoke aided with numbers, the complexities of language would be better understood. I wasn’t using “just” in those senses.

  3. Top | #23
    Contributor Speakpigeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,143
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,805
    Rep Power
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by fast View Post
    If every definition were numbered and we spoke aided with numbers, the complexities of language would be better understood. I wasn’t using “just” in those senses.
    Sure, but that's the sense used for this thread.
    EB

  4. Top | #24
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,148
    Archived
    14,025
    Total Posts
    19,173
    Rep Power
    59
    Definitions, at their core, are explanations written by others intended to capture the meaning expressed by fluent speakers. The problem, besides the underlying lack of precision, is that although they serve to assist us to quickly grasp the meaning, they utterly fail to capture the subtle nuances.

    Those lazy definitions you cite completely forsake the nuances to the extent that if unwitting readers decided to rely soley on those definitions for their one and only source of understanding, they would fail to grasp some very important distinctions. It is often the case that an unjust act goes hand in hand with being an unfair act, so I don’t fault either the fluent speakers or the lexigraphers that capture their usage, but a good argument for applying a better distinction by their usage is a superior overriding use.

  5. Top | #25
    Super Moderator Bronzeage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Deep South
    Posts
    6,617
    Archived
    7,568
    Total Posts
    14,185
    Rep Power
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by Speakpigeon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bronzeage View Post
    What I am saying, in plain language is, your argument is too silly for validity or non-validity to be considered.
    More likely, you're too lazy to be bothered.

    And the argument is definitely not too silly for most people to be willing to try to assess its validity.

    Still, you're obviously not so lazy that you wouldn't want to post at least some cheap comment.
    EB

    You already have your serious comment in a previous post. Using logic argument I can prove your saddle is a mule, but gain little in the transaction. As for lazy, my time is my own and I use it as I please.

  6. Top | #26
    Contributor ruby sparks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Northern Ireland
    Posts
    5,505
    Rep Power
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Bronzeage View Post
    Using logic argument I can prove your saddle is a mule.....
    Go for it.

  7. Top | #27
    Super Moderator Bronzeage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Deep South
    Posts
    6,617
    Archived
    7,568
    Total Posts
    14,185
    Rep Power
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by ruby sparks View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bronzeage View Post
    Using logic argument I can prove your saddle is a mule.....
    Go for it.
    A mule is something halfway between a horse and an ass.

  8. Top | #28
    Contributor ruby sparks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Northern Ireland
    Posts
    5,505
    Rep Power
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Bronzeage View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ruby sparks View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bronzeage View Post
    Using logic argument I can prove your saddle is a mule.....
    Go for it.
    A mule is something halfway between a horse and an ass.
    I never doubted you for a second.

  9. Top | #29
    Super Moderator Torin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    112
    Rep Power
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Speakpigeon View Post
    Using your personal sense of logic, i.e. your logical intuition, thank you to answer the following two questions.

    A) Which of the following propositions do you see as false, and which as true?
    (s1) The law is just.
    Some parts of the law in my country (USA) are just and others are not. I'm not comfortable giving a categorical affirmative or negative answer to this.

    (s2) Innocent people don’t go to jail.
    This is false. Isn't that obvious?

    (s3) If the law is just then innocent people don't go to jail.
    Also false, since an innocent person living under a just legal system can go to jail through an error of knowledge.

    (s4) It is not true that if the law is just then innocent people don't go to jail.​
    This is true. (See above.)

    B) That being said, do you see the following proposition as valid or not valid?
    (s5) It is not true that if the law is just then innocent people don't go to jail; therefore, the law is just.​
    I don't see how that follows.

  10. Top | #30
    Contributor Speakpigeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Paris, France, EU
    Posts
    6,143
    Archived
    3,662
    Total Posts
    9,805
    Rep Power
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by Torin View Post
    Some parts of the law in my country (USA) are just and others are not. I'm not comfortable giving a categorical affirmative or negative answer to this.
    Any specific example of some unjust part of the law?

    Quote Originally Posted by Torin View Post
    (s2) Innocent people don’t go to jail.
    This is false. Isn't that obvious?
    I would say it is, but I have seen too many apparently well-educated and rational people say absurd things... So I prefer to make sure.

    Quote Originally Posted by Torin View Post
    (s3) If the law is just then innocent people don't go to jail.
    Also false, since an innocent person living under a just legal system can go to jail through an error of knowledge.
    Good point. Any other reason?

    Quote Originally Posted by Torin View Post
    (s4) It is not true that if the law is just then innocent people don't go to jail.​
    This is true. (See above.)
    Right. Just checking.

    Quote Originally Posted by Torin View Post
    B) That being said, do you see the following proposition as valid or not valid?
    (s5) It is not true that if the law is just then innocent people don't go to jail; therefore, the law is just.​
    I don't see how that follows.
    OK, but would you say you have a distinct impression it does not follow?
    EB

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-13-2019, 06:25 AM
  2. Whence comes logic
    By Speakpigeon in forum Other Philosophical Discussions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-16-2018, 08:27 AM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-01-2018, 01:09 AM
  4. What is logic?
    By Speakpigeon in forum Logic and Epistemology
    Replies: 92
    Last Post: 03-20-2017, 12:35 PM
  5. Deductive Logic, Inductive Logic, and Logical Fallacies
    By Trodon in forum Logic and Epistemology
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 10-08-2015, 11:11 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •