I’ve been wanting to blog about this but obviously I have spent my time doing meaningless stuffs.
There as a discussion in Political Philosophy in class… and the question was:
“In order to be just, you need to recognize injustice actions”
I thought that was pretty clear cut. In order for people to fight for injustice, they need to know where and who is unjust. But there was this whole discussion by some students that some people will see unjust differently.
Why? Because everyone learned different “goods”, meaning different people from different groups may believe in different justice and injustice.
Again, I thought that was clear. I’m pretty much referring to the “New World” where it’s about the usual industrialized societies… where everyone knows about TV and have probably watched it. I’m not referring to tribes because I can define them as still hunting and gathering, and have yet been educated in the way we all are.
And I’m glad prof pointed out that there is this fundamental good that everyone has to value and not go against. And that if anybody from any societies were to violate this, it is absolute injustice. For example, killing a human life.
Then the discussion led to euthanasia, warfare, and suicides.
Apparently, I didn’t realize how rational most human beings have become until that discussion.
A lot of people (especially males) see the above as justified, and that it is not unjust. And it probably is relative to different societies because everyone have different version of values.
For Euthanasia, they argued that it is to the patient’s good to let him/her die since he/she is suffering. And that it is right for the doctor to administer or advise Euthanasia. However, prof mentioned, the key role that a doctor should fulfill is to save humans, and killing them under whatever conditions, is going against a doctor’s mission.
And the discussion started to gear towards war where… some believe, according to Socrates, that if one shouldn’t fight against injustice because it will perpetuate a cycle (where the enemy will get back, and the so-called-just will have to go against enemy again, and so on). I didn’t know why I didn’t raise my hand at this point, because I myself am unsure. But I believe this notion of fighting for justice, isn’t using violence against violence. Words can be used to “fight” for the just. That’s why men of wisdom, or rather Philosophers, do not use arms, they talk, they dialogue. People like Martin Luther King, Gandhi, Socrates, Plato, Daisaku Ikeda, they are the ones who fought without violence. But of course, most of them came to a pitiful end when they were assassinated, which I felt it total unjust and atrocious, yet this successful attempts to kill the good, just create more bad. Because all these became evidence that talks doesn’t work. Even a recent case that I realize from World Politics, where the Athenians who wanted to attack the Melians, massacred them even after Melians initated a dialogue for peace.
That led me to recall about Avatar’s bad guy saying, “Diplomacy has failed.”
And precisely all these awful things are going on, that is why Soka Gakkai exists. This is indeed the Latter Day of the Law… where everyone’s beliefs are running counter to the fundamental good/right.
But again, I figured that people shouldn’t focus on how/why they died, but what good they have created and what legacy they wanted to pass down. Isn’t it?
How about suicides? Somebody commented that if a person doesn’t see value in his/her life and that it is really tough to continue living, and had repetitively attempted to commit suicides, don’t we just let him/her?
Going back to dialogues that men of wisdom use, apparently, I believe it is with the heart of wanting the wrong to learn and realize what is right. And never the case of wanting them to be punished or tortured. But of course, classmates will just shoot this point down by disbelieving that it will never be possible to simply let an unjust person to learn to realize his/her mistakes and become just, simply over talking. There must be sanctions involved. There must be some kind of punishments…
In Buddhism, we believe in cause and effect. Every cause one creates, through thinking, speaking or action, with or without anybody knowing, will lead to an effect. Apparently, I believe wise people, know that we human beings need not administer sanctions ourselves, because it runs counter to the fundamental good…? And that even if one claims to be just, starts to do things that violates this fundamental good, will no longer be just… is it?
I am confused myself… and there is no end to this. I mean this can even branch out to capital punishment… or law, and plenty of things.
But I can only conclude something that prof had mentioned which echoed my thoughts.
BY NATURE, every human beings/living beings want to live. Basically, we search for food to overcome hunger so we won’t die of hunger. We’ll make sure we drink water so that we won’t die of thirst. Even if one who is suicidal, one who is already brain dead, his or her body mechanisms will still insist to function, to make sure our blood still flows, we still breathe oxygen, and continues till they cannot function anymore. Even if this person may look like he or she is suffering at the moment, and that from our perspective, he or she should die quickly so as to release his or her suffering. But unless we intervene, the body will continue to work till they can’t work anymore.
I saw an ant in the cup earlier on, which was the thing that retriggered my desire to write this post. I had killed countless of ants… but I paid particular attention to this.
I tried to drown the ant with water, for a few seconds, and see if the ant will die after a few seconds of emergence in water. When I let it breathe, it was probably lacking in oxygen, and choking… and had problems crawling. I believe it was already dizzy, and that is why it didn’t know where it was walking to. But it did try to walk… to survive… but i guess it got too weak, he lost its grip and dropped back into the water. I tried to save it by rushing to pour the water away, but it was too late. It died.
All living beings strive to live… struggle to just breathe 1 more breath. And nobody has that right to take that away. Not even when this person had done extremely wrong things.
No killing is justified. No war is justified.
Now that I look at it, probably the word JUSTIFY was created by people who are so rational that they don’t believe there’s absolute JUST, they decide to add a deFY to the word JUST, and make it seem like one can defy JUST when based with reasons.
That comes power play. I have been taking a lot of note on Marxists’ theory of the unhappiness of waged workers. And the bourgeoise’s exploitation of the proletariats. That will be my next post then…