RE: Argument from justice.
March 30, 2017 at 8:27 pm
(This post was last modified: March 30, 2017 at 8:28 pm by Jesster.)
(March 30, 2017 at 8:23 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:(March 30, 2017 at 8:19 pm)Jesster Wrote: I guess your university doesn't have any dictionaries, then. If I can't even make sense of your definitions, I'm not going to be able to follow your argument past step one. This is hardly even in a language I can identify. I can recognize the individual words, but they make no sense when placed in that order.Ok you explain how you understand justice. I looked up the definition on online and it was rather bad compared to what I learn in a first year political philosophy class. The reason is they simply define it circularly or are just trying to express its uses and convention.
I mean the underlying principle that things can be given their due and ought to be given their due.
If you aren't using a definition found in a dictionary, then you probably aren't talking about the same thing everyone else is. It's not my job to provide a definition for you, either. Dictionaries have branching definitions that describe the multiple common uses of the word. Either pick a definition that we can recognize or use a different word.
Here's a hint for you about the word "justice". The root of the word is "just". That may get you to a definition I can actually make sense of.
I don't believe you. Get over it.