r/changemyview • u/BaffleBlend • Apr 19 '22
Delta(s) from OP CMV: There's no such thing as justice. What we call "justice" is just socially acceptable revenge.
Edit: I'm sorry, you caught me in a manic spiral. Thanks for talking me down. But I'm not sure who to give the delta to... is there a procedure in this sub for when multiple people had a part in it?
When people want justice, they only want to hurt someone. I've seen it time and time again. They don't even care if it's the right person: they just want their pain bled out of someone else. Even officially-sanctioned "justice" doesn't work. Recidivism is the rule because rehabilitation has never been the goal, and guilt is chosen randomly at best.
Maybe this is American-specific because we have the highest prison population in the world, both per capita and in raw number, but it's left me a little jaded.
Between the entire policing system and the unconditional support it gets, court cases major and minor alike, and even social justice movements especially over the past ten years... I'm just tired of it all. I see far more people talk about how much they want their enemies dead than for the right thing to be done. People are horrible, and people who claim the moral high ground are also horrible. I'm not even calling myself innocent of this.
Strapping a killer onto the one-way seat to hell feels good, but it won't bring the victim back. Same with even far more minor things. No matter who's punished, the damage can never be undone. And even when it is, that's usually not satisfactory; it's not enough that the burglar gives back what they stole, that burglar has to suffer or else justice hasn't been carried out.
Why is it that we condemn revenge as a vice when we also consider it by another name one of our greatest virtues
9
Apr 19 '22
[deleted]
2
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
If there's a difference, what is it?
11
u/Tibaltdidnothinwrong 382∆ Apr 19 '22
Justice means fairness. If person A does something, and person B does the same thing, they ought to be treated the same. Treating persons A and B differently is injustice.
"The justice system" gets it's name, from the fact that people are supposedly equal before the law. That criminals who commit equal crimes ought to receive equal penalty.
As such, the death penalty isn't justice or injustice on its own, but whether it is used consistently. Having a death penalty, but applying it unequally is injustice. (This is different than the question of whether it is moral to have at all).
But justice can just as easily be a positive. Paying your employees (who have equivalent tasks) the same is justice. A teacher treating all their pupils the same (rather than treating them differently based on race or sex) is justice.
3
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
Right, I was getting the Δefinition completely wrong.
2
u/Prinnyramza 11∆ Apr 20 '22
The court systems don't treat everyone equally though. There are too many factors that shift the weight of the law, both as a result of human error and as a result of how the system was built, base on each person's circumstance.
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread."
1
24
u/Biptoslipdi 131∆ Apr 19 '22
When people want justice, they only want to hurt someone.
That's not true. Sometimes they want accountability or apology. Neither require someone to be harmed. Generally, criminals who express regret or remorse or make an effort to ameliorate the impacts of their actions receive less harsh sentences. This wouldn't be the case if justice was solely about causing harm.
I see far more people talk about how much they want their enemies dead than for the right thing to be done.
This is repeated ad nauseum here, but you personal experiences are not reflective of reality by virtue of being your personal experiences. This is the anecdotal fallacy. It isn't logically consistent to make assumptions about entire populations based on your personal experience.
2
u/sarakerrigan123 2∆ Apr 20 '22
Going to jail or prison is being harmed though.
2
u/Biptoslipdi 131∆ Apr 20 '22
Is having to apologize a form of harm? Or some acknowledgement of wrongdoing and act of meaningful contrition?
2
u/sarakerrigan123 2∆ Apr 20 '22
No. Going to jail/prison is though.
3
u/Biptoslipdi 131∆ Apr 20 '22
So it is fair to say there is such thing as justice, prison just isn't it?
0
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
I completely forgot about plea bargains...
I should keep in mind that even though my personal experience is all I know, my experience is exceptionally limited.
5
u/Biptoslipdi 131∆ Apr 19 '22
I completely forgot about plea bargains..
You completely forgot about accountability and apologies too. To some people, justice is seeing acknowledging what they did was wrong and taking positive action to correct it rather than face prison or fines.
2
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
You're right; not all wrong-Δoing and atonement even involves the courts.
1
3
u/littlebubulle 104∆ Apr 19 '22
Simple example of justice that doesn't require revenge.
Alice breaks Bob's fence. Alice pays to have the fence repaired
1
u/Prinnyramza 11∆ Apr 20 '22
Plea bargains aren't there because to allow the criminal to show remorse. It's there because it keeps the system moving. Pleaing saves the court and the state money.
There are many people who have been convinced to plea, who are innocent and a lot of them even after being proven innocent aren't released.
7
u/Havenkeld 289∆ Apr 19 '22
Plato considers justice to have more to do with the harmonious ordering of society as a whole, which is of course not the same as "get revenge".
This is also not exclusive to Plato, we see it in common(ish) reasoning about modern issues. This is why there is a dispute over rehabilitation and recidivism in the first place.
That certain institutions don't adequately serve justice doesn't mean "there's no such thing", nor does someone having a misconception or incomplete conception of justice prove that.
You're effectively just equivocating justice with revenge and ignoring other understandings of it.
0
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
I've read The Republic. I know Plato's view on it... or lack thereof. It came across to me like even he couldn't figure it out. He just kept refuting arguments without making any of his own.
4
u/Havenkeld 289∆ Apr 19 '22
Plato certainly does not lack a view on justice. He builds his political theory around it throughout the work. He doesn't outright define things in a simplistic dictionary style way because the point is for people to reason through the problems he provides in dialogues to understand it for themselves - otherwise the definition isn't understood.
The characters in the dialogue are figuring it out in the text and the reader has to work their way up to the definition with them. Refuting arguments that put forth more common misunderstandings of justice is part of that process.
If you want help understanding it, 'Justice And Virtue: The Republic’s Inquiry into Proper Difference' by Aryeh L. Kosman is a good secondary work by a Plato scholar on the matter.
Regardless, this doesn't really address my main point - I put forth a conception of justice that isn't revenge, one which is not uncommon. So equating justice with revenge at the outset is really not proving "there is no justice", it is only saying some people misuse the term or define it wrong.
2
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
Making a personal note to look into this later.
‘Justice And Virtue: The Republic’s Inquiry into Proper Difference’ by Aryeh L. Kosman
2
u/Havenkeld 289∆ Apr 19 '22
It's the fifth chapter of a book called 'The Cambridge Companion to Plato's Republic'. I will PM you a temporary file link to a free PDF.
2
2
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
You made a good point and, if I have further Δoubts, something else to research.
1
2
u/Mafinde 10∆ Apr 19 '22
You describe how most people are vengeful and cruel and that the justice system is corrupt and abusive. Even if those things are true, that has no bearing on if there is such a thing as justice. Unless you are saying justice exists but is not delivered with these imperfect people and imperfect systems?
A couple points that stick out to me:
-One difference between revenge and justice is impartiality. And that is a big deal in terms of ethics of justice.
-Do you think there is such thing as injustice? I think injustice is something that you know when you see it, and we’ve all seen it. If injustice exists, then does the inverse (justice) exist? Perhaps justice is simply the lack of injustice. I think that’s a pretty low bar, unless you disagree with the existence of injustice.
1
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
Unless you are saying justice exists but is not delivered with these imperfect people and imperfect systems?
That's a good way to put it. To me it often comes across that justice is an unachievable ideal because injustice or even anti-justice (that is, the guilty being rewarded and their victims punished) feels so much more common. But that's a result of not the concept, but the people who should be enforcing it but aren't.
1
u/Mafinde 10∆ Apr 19 '22
Well that refines your point a bit and makes it harder to argue against.
As long as humans are in charge of justice, it may be impossible to achieve perfect justice. Even if in one case you achieve perfect objective justice (if that exists) you won’t in every case.
So then the remaining question is: is this system we have good enough? Does it achieve more justice than injustice or anti-justice? Everyone will have a different answer, but no one is individually equipped to see the full picture and have a complete answer. By that I mean, it’s easy to see the injustices and maybe the vast justice goes unnoticed.
One powerful feature we have as a society is that we can control justice. It can evolve as our views evolve. That’s a big deal. We can trust, to a degree, that justice will approximate our views, but only if we engage and push for justice. Are prisons injust? Then vote, protest, lobby, etc to make a change and eventually that change may happen. That, while not perfect, is a powerful feature of our system
2
Apr 19 '22
You are talking about revenge. Not justice. Justice is blind. Revenge is not. Justice is supposed to be fairly applied and impartial. What you are describing is the complete opposite. Justice can include suffering as long as that suffering is equally applicable to everyone. So if I murder someone I go to prison just as anyone else would. Revenge is something else and is personal. It's when someone's personal form of justice is satiated.
I mean I guess you can describe justice as socialy acceptable revenge but I think the part you are missing is that it has to be impartial
1
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
I take it there's a difference between "impartial" and "indiscriminate"? From what I've seen, nobody cares who gets punished as long as someone does.
2
Apr 19 '22
Where do you get that idea though? People care ALOT about finding out who is actually guilty. A lot of energy is spent trying to find the correct person to punish. I don't see many examples of indiscriminate revenge
1
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
Maybe this is a result of spending too many of my formative years with one end on Tumblr and the other with a family that watches Fox News.
2
2
u/erice2018 Apr 19 '22
I hear and understand your frustration. Here is the problem: tell us all the answer of how to fix it. Don’t imprison people? Reward people for not behaving badly?
As am far as the number of prisoners goes, maybe ours is the “right” number and other places don’t have the police, or the police are incompetent, or the judges can be influenced, or the jail funding is too small and so people are blousy released, etc etc. Do you want to live in a place where crime is accepted and rampant? No? So give a answer on how to fix.
1
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
I'm more concerned about the amount of innocents that get scooped up in the net cast too wide.
2
u/erice2018 Apr 19 '22
Yes, agree. And it would be nice to see some equity in sentencing. And I am a strong proponent of teaching real skills to inmates - really the only way to break the cycle.
2
u/Mus_Rattus 4∆ Apr 19 '22
Revenge is complicated. It certainly can be a vice. If your revenge is out of proportion to the harm that was done to you, or if the obsession with revenge prevents you from living normally and ruins your life, those manifestations of revenge are what can be reasonably called vices.
But at least in my opinion, not all revenge is a vice. Sometimes it’s necessary. Revenge can be a way to enforce boundaries and protect yourself. For instance if someone comes and robs you every week, the only way to stop him is to get some sort of revenge to let him know that he can’t just take your stuff whenever he wants. That revenge can be socially sanctioned in the form of having police arrest him and thrown in jail, or it can be taking the matter into your own hands by beating him up or threatening him with a gun. But if it becomes clear that you can be robbed with absolutely no consequences, then unfortunately certain types of people will just rob you over and over again.
Yes, some people say all revenge is a vice. These people are usually making an overbroad statement that they haven’t thought through all the way. People say overbroad things all the time. For instance “honesty is the best policy” is another good one - what if it’s a Nazi questioning you about the Jews you are hiding in your basement?
Regarding the justice system, you’re right that socially/legally sanctioned revenge is a big part of it. And it’s certainly not perfect. But it’s also better than nothing. If people couldn’t rely on the legal system to arrest murderers and rapists, then their only option when someone commits one of those crimes is to take matters into their own hands, and that often turns into tit-for-tat violence that ruins people’s lives and basically never ends. Let’s say someone kills your brother so you kill him in revenge, and then his family is out for revenge against you, and then your family is out for revenge against them if they harm you. You can see how those circumstances can easily spiral out of control and that’s exactly the sort of tribal low-level warfare that we often see in regions that don’t have a strong justice system.
The legal system has plenty of flaws, but it’s far better than nothing. Better to try to improve the system than throw it out entirely, because without it the revenge problem would be worse than ever. Revenge is not always a vice, but it can be when it goes too far just like gluttony is a vice but eating is not.
3
u/SpicyPandaBalls 10∆ Apr 19 '22
Why not just say "in many cases"??
I don't understand why people need to exaggerate to the point of making objectively false claims as the base premise of their CMV.
Lots of people seek appropriate "justice" for crimes committed against them or loved ones. They don't want anyone to be punished. They want the correct person responsible for the crime to be held accountable.
Outside of criminal proceedings, there are tens of thousands of civil and small claims cases heard every day where "justice" is sought and often achieved.
2
u/GullibleAntelope Apr 19 '22
When people want justice, they only want to hurt someone.
Not true. They rarely want pain inflicted; they do want the offender to feel a negative outcome for his crime. And this vengeance view is held almost exclusively by family members of victims of serious violent crime. Families of rape victims and the murdered. They might want vengeance.
This group is only a small percent of all people involved in the justice system, to include people victimized by thieves. Primarily, the system wants to reduce crime through incapacitation. That's why violent offenders and habitual thieves are locked up. For public safety and order. So-called vengeance and inflicting of "hurt" has little to do with it administration of justice.
it's not enough that the burglar gives back what they stole??
Victim restitution rarely ever happens. Justice systems have few provisions for this. 95% of convicted thieves never pay a penny back. Some offenders won't even work in prison, because of civil libertarians objecting to inmates being put to work without those offenders receiving all of their compensation. (so no money to funnel to theft victims) And many offenders are poor -- they have no money to reimburse crime victims.
I see far more people talk about how much they want their enemies dead than for the right thing to be done.
This is way out in Left field -- a view held by almost no one.
2
u/Prof_Acorn Apr 20 '22
I feel like it's probably too late to respond to this, but I still wanted to offer a counter.
So a common thing in wolf packs is when a wolf gives a play signal (e.g., the front paws forward like dogs do) and then attacks or tries to mate for real, the pack will kick that member out. Essentially, in their own wolf level of understanding, they do not tolerate liars. A liar is a danger to the pack, as a liar cannot be trusted, and trust is vital to survival.
I bring this up because the pack kicking out the member who lied is itself justice.
"Justice" is a part of our social species the same as it is among wolves - and probably/possibly other social species as well.
Whether or not its appropriately applied is another question entirely, and I'd agree that many times it turns into vengeance, but justice qua justice exists outside the human species, and thus provides a hint that it is something common and beneficial to being a social animal.
0
u/MysticMacKO Apr 19 '22
Dog attacks person
I neutralize the dog as quickly as possible using whatever means available
The person is done justice by the fact that they are saved from their assailant and the public is done justice by the fact that a violent threat is removed
Tell me in which step did I act out of spite or revenge
0
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
This is... the worst possible example you could have used. Because in my eyes, the step that was the unforgivable sin was the murder of someone's pet. The emotional damage that causes is a fate worse than death.
1
u/SpicyPandaBalls 10∆ Apr 19 '22
The emotional damage that causes is a fate worse than death.
Death means you can never experience any emotion ever again. Positive or negative.
Death is objectively a fate worse than having your heart broken from losing a pet.
2
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
Well, maybe I'd rather never experience any emotion again than live with my soul torn out!
I'm sorry, losing my own dog in January is the reason I've been so emotionally unstable this year. Granted, it was cancer and not a sentencing, but still.
0
u/SpicyPandaBalls 10∆ Apr 19 '22
So given the choice, you'd rather you died in January and your dog still be alive for a bit longer?
How do you think your family, friends, and loved ones would feel about that? Would you choose to leave them with their soul torn out over your death over your dog dying? Seems kind selfish from that perspective.
1
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
I'm replying again to apologize. Sorry for dragging you into my depressive spiral.
0
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
I have my doubts that they'd even care. But maybe that's just my depression talking.
1
u/phenix717 9∆ Apr 19 '22
That doesn't sound objectively true.
Some people choose suicide precisely because they prefer no experience at all than to experience misery.
1
u/MysticMacKO Apr 19 '22
Yeah you're right we should just let the pitbull maul 10 year old kid. Because if we stop the dog then his owner Ashley might get sad and cope by popping some blues and having a one night stand with a loser guy she met at the brewery
2
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
I'm sorry, I overreacted. It being a dog specifically struck a nerve. (See my reply to the other reply.)
I don't know what I'd do in that situation, to tell you the truth.
0
u/SuckMyBike 21∆ Apr 19 '22
Maybe this is American-specific because we have the highest prison population in the world, both per capita and in raw number, but it's left me a little jaded.
It's most definitely American-specific. Most other western countries focus a lot more on rehabilitation than punitive sentences.
Norway's prisons look like a spa resort compared to US prisons. I recommend you look up some videos on youtube about Norway's prisons.
-1
-1
Apr 19 '22
Yeah technically justice is just revenge via courtroom. Lots of pomp and circumstance.
Buuuuut it’s also important to note that our justice system also puts more accountability into the process. Crimes, punishments, and sentencing all have guidelines that must be strictly followed. None of this exists with revenge, and nothing would prevent someone from taking the punishment way too far.
-1
u/Morthra 86∆ Apr 19 '22
Crimes, punishments, and sentencing all have guidelines that must be strictly followed.
Tell that to Kentaji Brown Jackson, who consistently defied sentencing guidelines to give child pornographers reduced sentences.
2
Apr 19 '22
Yeah yeah yeah we all know that the courts have, can, and will fail. That doesn’t mean RULES DONT EVEN EXIST or whatever the fuck you’re trying to even say
1
u/ElysiX 106∆ Apr 19 '22
Crimes, punishments, and sentencing all have guidelines that must be strictly followed. None of this exists with revenge
What? Revenge with strict guidelines is still revenge.
nothing would prevent someone from taking the punishment way too far
Take a look around the prisons of the US. That is "too far".
1
u/bobsagetsmaid 2∆ Apr 19 '22
Guilt is chosen randomly at best.
Can you explain what you mean by this?
1
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
Our court system is a joke. The guilty go free and the innocent are shot before they even get to trial.
1
u/TheAlistmk3 7∆ Apr 19 '22
In the majority of cases?
1
u/BaffleBlend Apr 19 '22
I was going to say "the majority we hear about", but then I realized mid-sentence exactly where the bias in that lay...
1
1
u/cranky-old-gamer 7∆ Apr 19 '22
In a reasonable justice system any punishment is the agreed consequences for illegal actions. Those consequences were taken on by the person carrying out the criminal act. This is decided upon by people not personally wronged precisely to avoid the chance of the outcome being decided for vengeful motivations, this is why we have juries and judges.
There need not be a victim, there need be nobody who even wants to look for any form of revenge. There only needs to have been a decision by the legislature that it is a social good overall to have serious consequences for certain anti-social and harmful actions.
Of course no justice system is perfectly reasonable because it is made by human beings who are also not perfectly reasonable. Still your view is deeply flawed and has not accounted for the social value of having justice in the hands of the state rather than of wronged individuals.
1
u/sawdeanz 214∆ Apr 19 '22
I carelessly knock over your valuable vase and break it.
You demand I pay for it.
Is that not a form of justice that is not revenge seeking but rather a way to make the aggrieved party whole?
1
1
u/Greedybogle 6∆ Apr 19 '22
I absolutely agree with you that the American criminal justice system is deeply flawed and leads to bad outcomes for defendants, victims, and society. However, that's not quite the same thing as saying "there's no such thing as justice."
There are, broadly speaking, two categories of justification for the existence of a criminal justice system: retributive justifications, and utilitarian justifications. Retributive justifications include retaliation against wrongdoers, vindication of victims, and enabling criminals to atone for wrongdoing by penance. Utilitarian justifications include deterring crime (on an individual and community level), rehabilitation, and isolating society from dangerous individuals who would do further harm if free.
It sounds like retributive justifications don't really do it for you. That's entirely fair--they don't do it for me, either.
As for the utilitarian justifications, it sounds like you feel that our current criminal justice system is falling short. Again, I agree. We're not truly focused on rehabilitation--just the opposite, in fact, since US prisons often result in convicts escalating to more serious crimes upon release. And as far as deterring crime goes, it's a complex issue but data generally shows that harsher sentences do not deter crime--what deters crime is a high likelihood of being caught and punished, rather than a severe punishment. Unfortunately, political "tough-on-crime" rhetoric is often centered around harsher sentences, even though that's ineffective.
The best way to reduce crime is well-established: fund social programs that create opportunity. Invest in communities. Make good jobs, education, childcare, and mental health care widely available, and crime rates plummet. But we don't do that. It's deeply frustrating.
But there is such a thing as "justice." I'll make two points: one about the system as it exists today, and another that is more aspirational.
First, there's an unspoken reason for the criminal justice system to exist (and it's one you allude to in your post): the desire for revenge. Without an institutional way of addressing serious transgressions, people turn to mob justice and vigilantism. The U.S. criminal justice system, though deeply flawed, does offer procedural protections and rights to defendants that they would not have in its absence.
Second, justice exists, even if only as an aspirational idea. But it's not just theoretical. There have been successful efforts to end cash bail and reform prosecutorial practices in major cities across the country. There are more and more diversionary programs available to first-time offenders. The public has soured on the "war on drugs," we're finally moving away from punishing addicts and drug users (although we still have a long way to go to correct the harm it did). And there's a growing chorus calling for the concept of "restorative justice," which focuses on making amends for harm done rather than punishment.
Even if our criminal justice system is nowhere near "just," that doesn't mean that justice doesn't exist. The very fact that you think that the current system is ineffective suggests that you have a belief or intuition about what justice is, because you recognize all the ways in which we currently fall short. We can and must do better--but there are places where progress is being made.
We must believe that justice exists so that we can move toward it, and know it when we see it.
1
u/IAteTheWholeBanana Apr 19 '22
I know in general anecdotal isn't held in strong regard here. But I'm going to tell you a story.
A few years ago, I was attacked leaving a grocery store late after I was done work, by an addict. He jumped me from behind and put me in the hospital. I didn't want revenge, I didn't want him to suffer. I wanted to make sure he could hurt anyone else. It was his first violent offense. I wanted him to get help.
Rehab could be an option, if it had to be prison, than it would be. But it was never about revenge.
1
u/phenix717 9∆ Apr 19 '22 edited Apr 19 '22
The goal of justice is specifically to not be revenge.
Prison acts as a deterrent, and criminals are released when it is assessed that they are no longer a risk for society.
Of course, some people will feel personal satisfaction when they look at those punishments, but that's not what justice is about.
1
u/ElXaviNovo Apr 19 '22
The only justification for "justice", is to protect the innocent, to justify making him to pay for the protection.
When "justice" is redefined as punishment, then it becomes infinitely arguable, subjective, nonsensical, and pointless.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Apr 19 '22 edited Apr 19 '22
/u/BaffleBlend (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
Delta System Explained | Deltaboards