Today there was a lot of debate about whether or not justice is natural in human beings. I think its really important to first define what natural means, and to realize that it may not have a direct association to what we think is "good". Natural, to me, signifies something that occurs in nature, without human reason. Things that are almost animalistic, like killing another creature without remorse or taking what one needs without a thought of whether it is "just", is what seems natural.
However when things like these are performed among humans, they are thought of as injustices. Someone brought up the fact that many people would indulge in unjust acts if the laws controlling them were taken away; i.e. murder, theft, violence, etc. This inclination to do unjust things seems somewhat natural, but in this case natural does not have a good meaning. And in this case of lawlessness, many more people would revert to the ways of justice. Though not because justice is natural to humans, but because justice is the response to injustice.
I completely agree! I think what you said about natural occurring with human reason is the perfect way to put it. This proves justice is not natural because there is obviously a lot of people putting a lot of reason to this concept in just The Republic. Justice is something created by humans to to make civil society and protect the interests of the community and its safety.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your definition of natural. In my opinion, Humans in their natural form are barbarous and almost animalistic. If humans were put in an environment that was not governed by any laws or punishments then they would resort to the injustice. Following that I completely agree with your statement that these acts of injustice would thus result in justice and tranquility. People would much rather live a life of peace and security then a life of constant violence and fear from death.
ReplyDeleteI agree that natural implies that people are animalistic at the core, but what I don't agree with is barbaric or that if people were not governed they would resort to violence and injustice. Animalistic means behavior that is like animals, it describes all animals, not just violent ones. I think animalistic has been given a negative connotation when the term could describe people that act like lions or people that act like bunnies. Without laws or government, I don't think all humans would act violently as Wendell describes.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your definition of natural as "animalistic". I find it interesting that many people associate animals with violence, when in reality animals are truly peaceful creatures. Just as we kill certain animals to get meat, so too do animals prey upon one another. These actions are done because of the desire to survive and are truly separate from human reason. For this reason, I believe justice is not natural. Justice involves human reasoning, as we can see from the many dialogues in The Republic between Socrates and other men. It takes many in depth conversations for Socrates to decide precisely what Justice is, so I think in this way, we can determine that Justice could not be something natural.
ReplyDeleteEven though we associate "natural" with "animalistic," we also associate human beings as the only animal that has a conscious in the sense that we have emotions and feelings which make it wrong to kill another person. Although humans are subject to natural instincts, we are also subjected to reason. It is because of this that we are able to define a sense of justice that is not present otherwise in the animal kingdom.
ReplyDeleteI think that morals and justice are two separate things that are easy to get mixed together. I don't agree that people are born naturally animalistic or barbaric- I think that everyone is born with their own sense of morals, and what matters is how they put their own sense of morals to use and as well as their experiences that help form and develop what they think justice is. However, because everyone is born with their own sense of morals, it is possible that one's sense of justice could be anthers' sense of injustice. Either way, I think that in times of lawlessness, there will always be people who have a strong sense of justice, one that can be considered "good".
ReplyDeleteAmy Shih
I like your view on this. Although justice seems to be natural, I agree that in reality it isn't due to the fact that humans are inclined to do unjust things naturally. I think justice isn't natural because it's something that has to essentially be imposed on people through laws and restraints. Because, as everyone said, justice requires consciousness and morals, I feel as if this takes away the whole "natural" aspect of it. I feel that if justice was natural, there wouldn't be specific rules to follow or even punishments.
ReplyDeleteJustice does not seem like a natural virtue, but rather an implemented system. In order for our community to be run better, we adopt or conform to ideas of justice. In this context, justice seems artificial, because people would sometimes act against their own natural tendencies to be just. If they violate or go against our notion of justice, then they would be met with disapproval.
ReplyDeleteI think that's a great addition to my point, Aaron. Natural does not necessarily denote things that are good or wholesome, just as unnatural does not only imply bad and undesirable things. There is a certain bias that people have when using them because they both have distinct connotations. I do not think justice is natural, it seems pretty unnatural when observed in humans, but it is something that we have created and have come to use regularly. Things like cars, phones, and certain medical treatments can be considered "unnatural" because they were developed by humans and not by nature, but they serve an important purpose regardless of their origins, just like justice.
ReplyDeleteI still think that the basis of justice must be natural, just due to the fact that it came from humans, it came from nature. Yes, it does come with human reasoning, but that means it is natural among humans. Yes we are animals–and I agree with everyone that said that being like an animal does not at all relate to violent actions. I think that remorse is naturally felt when one becomes self aware. I cant say that humans have always been self aware, because I dont know that, but I know that as we evolved and innovated, we not only became self aware, but we were given more time to focus on things other than just survival, which is what our long past ancestors had to do. With more time to explore and probe at human existence, I think humans began to understand feelings like remorse, pride, shame, compassion, etc. This is how we have progressed through time. Just because it wasn't always recognized, practiced, or cherished in society doesn't mean that it does not exist naturally.
ReplyDelete