Active Now

Randy D
Discussion » Questions » Life and Society » Universal Justice. IF THERE WERE such a thing operating 24/7 would you be pleased or terrified?
RosieG

Universal Justice. IF THERE WERE such a thing operating 24/7 would you be pleased or terrified?

That would mean that EVERYONE eventually would receive what he/she had earned/deserves. No exceptions. No escape. No Exit. Death, taxes and getting what you deserve. A 3-legged stool. Would that be cool?

Posted - November 13, 2017
Tags : None

Responses


  • I think the term you're looking for is 'Big Brother'....it's here already but not yet completely
      November 13, 2017 3:47 AM MST
    2

  • 113301
    Nope. Some unseen unidentified unknown "other" that would automatically effect it. Whether machine or other-worldly interference from intellectually superior beings living in parallel universes or other dimensions. No Big Brother. That is an invention of human beings. What I'm talking about is something far beyond and above and out-of-reach of human beings. Did I explain myself sufficiently? Wanna try again? Thank you for your reply Strange and Happy Monday! :)
      November 13, 2017 6:19 AM MST
    0

  • 5354
    I would want to know just WHO defined what was just.
      November 13, 2017 5:06 AM MST
    0

  • 113301
    It would be other-worldly immensely intellectually superior to us and far-advanced-beyond us life forms or machines or something we could not even imagine since we are so low on the scale of comprehension. Questioning them would be useless. We wouldn't understand the replies. Not what you wanted to hear I fear. Oh dear. :(
      November 13, 2017 6:22 AM MST
    0

  • 5354
    A divine being laying down the law, and meeting out punishments as he sees fit ? I would be terrified.
    And very angry.
      November 14, 2017 10:37 PM MST
    1

  • 113301
     No JakobA. Not a divine being. An automatic mechanism by which justice would be meted out for everyone. You take your car in for diagnostic tests to see what's wrong. Isn't there a machine that does readouts and reports back the areas that are not working right? The machine diagnoses and the human reads the diagnosis and knows what to repair. Now you will say that someone had to design and build that machine. True. But a divine being? No. We don't know a lot. We have very serious limitations not the least of which is that we only have so many senses and we are only able to perceive 3 dimensions. We assume that's all there is since we believe if there were more we would be aware of it. Well maybe not. People who are blind don't see what's there. People who are deaf don't hear what' there. Humans are deaf and blind figuratively and intellectually limited literally Did you see the movie Charlie and the Chocolate Factory? If you did do you remember the scale that discarded the 'bad eggs" to some unseen oblivion?. All someone had to do was stand on it and the "machine" determined if the person was a good egg or a bad egg. A doctor uses machines to test people. A stethoscope facilitates listening to the heart. You have MRI and CT scans to take picture of the body . The machines are impersonal.  They do their jobs automatically. Why can't there be an impersonal mechanized something that metes out justice? Now you will ask who determines what justice is? I think we know what is bad and what isn't. You murder an innocent person or torture or rape. Who is going to say that is a good thing aside from the mentally deranged? You betray, cheat, steal, lie, sabotage  to get your way. Who is going to say that was the right thing to do? I digress. Thank you for your reply and Happy Wednesday..
      November 15, 2017 2:11 AM MST
    0

  • 5354
    There may be such a device for making car-diagnostics. I doubt it is very useful without a skilled mechanic going over the report it makes and weeding out the irrelevancies. But even if it does exist and does work it is still something made by human beings who told it what to look for, what tests to do, etc, etc. Transferring that metaphor to your original question my original answer still stand:
    "WHO define what is just ?".
      November 15, 2017 8:06 PM MST
    2

  • 113301
    You really think it is that undefinable then? Murdering innocent people. Is that just? Raping/torturing/sexually abusing people. Is that just?  Lying/betraying/sabotaging/harming people to benefit yourself. How is that just? I don't think it takes a brain surgeon to figure out what is just and what isn't. I think REASONABLE people should be able to agree  that a Donald Trump is a worthless piece of trash as a human being. His supporters I think are unreasonable so I would not want any of them to decide what is just since they clearly would have the same skewed view of that as they do of supporting and electing a sexually abusive arrogant ignorant conceited man who is quite possibly a traitor. I won't ask that you be on the panel of decisionmakers. I think you are hostile to the idea and any hostility would undermine the whole point. That's OK. You calls 'em as you sees 'em. So do I. Thank you for your reply JakobA and Happy Thursday!  :)
      November 16, 2017 2:21 AM MST
    1

  • 5354
    It it is the kind of thing thet must be clearly and specifically stated before handing over the power to make such decisions to a device or an individual.

    I France (at least up until some 50 years ago) "killing in affect" was a legal concept. If you found your wife busily making out with another man you could kill him without consequence. It would not be murder, it would be "killing in affect", understandable and condoned. But if, in the same situation, you killed your wife, that would be murder.

    So yes, I really do think it is that difficult to define.
      November 16, 2017 9:16 PM MST
    1

  • 113301
    I never understood a defense based on "in the heat of passion" or some such thing. What's the difference between premeditated murder that is well planned and one that is "in the heat of the moment"?   I think legally premeditated carries a harsher sentence. Why? Thank you for your reply JakobA and Happy Friday!  :) This post was edited by RosieG at November 17, 2017 1:28 AM MST
      November 17, 2017 1:27 AM MST
    0

  • 5354
    Well "premeditated" pretty much means you planned it before doing it ;-))

    Anyway there is considerable precedent, the old Romans had a similar law.
      November 17, 2017 7:06 AM MST
    0

  • 2219

    As already mentioned, depends who's running it. Their ideals may differ from yours. As far as the last few commandments are concerned, they are not controversial, nor even particularly religious. 

    Some suggest God, but again is it the Old Testament version or the New Testament one. I expect other religions have their own analogies. 

    Irl, you will have human judges but if their power is absolute, that is likely to corrupt them. 

     

    This post was edited by Malizz at November 17, 2017 7:12 AM MST
      November 16, 2017 3:24 AM MST
    3

  • 113301
    Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. I cannot disagree with thee. I suppose having enormous power over others is like a narcotic. Once hooked you have to take more and more and more to stay high. Thank you for your reply Malizz and Happy Friday! :)
      November 17, 2017 1:30 AM MST
    1

  • 2219

    The dear old 3 legged repentance stool.

    Great sport for the Kirk Session until Jesus points out that none of them are without sin either. 

      November 17, 2017 12:10 PM MST
    0