0
Why justice doesn't trifle in opinions
Posted by Parody of Language,
07 September 2011
·
391 views
We're all tyrants insofar as we have opinions, this is why opinions have points to them. By means of opinions we are either oppressing others (whether in the large or the small), or we are setting things up to oppress others. We wouldn't even bother having opinions if we couldn't do this, otherwise opining would be wholly superfluous.
But the whole system works out, because we all have opinions, but there is no one of us for whom all of our opinions win out. Sometimes one of our opinions win out, but other times our opinions are repressed and we back off.
On the other hand, I would call no one just who didn't know the art of disarming his or her own opinions. You are just, in part, if you're sensitive to the role that having and expressing opinions actually has. That is, if the above proposition that opinions are tyrannical seems obvious to you. Maybe you have, at times, become afraid to speak, because you worry that adding your opinion to the wider nexus of opinions may not achieve the appropriate balance. You don't know whether your opinion is true or not, but you feel that it should be represented, but nor should it completely dominate. Which is more just, to repress your opinion, or to allow your opinion to oppress others?
Oh, I should back up a bit. You don't know whether your opinions are true or not. If you look closely at the origin of your opinions, you would realize that you didn't form them on the basis of their truth. You wouldn't have opinions if you didn't want to attack others, or defend yourself, with them. But there's a logic to opinions when you have many of them at the same time. They are like soldiers on a battlefield, and they should all be on the same time. These opinions attack here, and meanwhile these other opinions come about on the other side, and attack. Mean while, defensive opinions lay at wait where you are most vulnerable.
If we call justice the excellence in making judgments, then we can see why this capacity wouldn't trifle with opinions. I don't possess much justice myself, I'm too obtuse, but there have been times when I've witnessed judgments more just than mine, and have therefore deferred to them. But these are the people who are instantly, and totally, turned off by politics.
Who could blame them?
But the whole system works out, because we all have opinions, but there is no one of us for whom all of our opinions win out. Sometimes one of our opinions win out, but other times our opinions are repressed and we back off.
On the other hand, I would call no one just who didn't know the art of disarming his or her own opinions. You are just, in part, if you're sensitive to the role that having and expressing opinions actually has. That is, if the above proposition that opinions are tyrannical seems obvious to you. Maybe you have, at times, become afraid to speak, because you worry that adding your opinion to the wider nexus of opinions may not achieve the appropriate balance. You don't know whether your opinion is true or not, but you feel that it should be represented, but nor should it completely dominate. Which is more just, to repress your opinion, or to allow your opinion to oppress others?
Oh, I should back up a bit. You don't know whether your opinions are true or not. If you look closely at the origin of your opinions, you would realize that you didn't form them on the basis of their truth. You wouldn't have opinions if you didn't want to attack others, or defend yourself, with them. But there's a logic to opinions when you have many of them at the same time. They are like soldiers on a battlefield, and they should all be on the same time. These opinions attack here, and meanwhile these other opinions come about on the other side, and attack. Mean while, defensive opinions lay at wait where you are most vulnerable.
If we call justice the excellence in making judgments, then we can see why this capacity wouldn't trifle with opinions. I don't possess much justice myself, I'm too obtuse, but there have been times when I've witnessed judgments more just than mine, and have therefore deferred to them. But these are the people who are instantly, and totally, turned off by politics.
Who could blame them?
