Analysis Of The Article ' Testimonial Injustice ' And ' How Do You Know It? '

Moving on, the author explained that the concept of epistemology is a “system of knowing” instead of simply “way of knowing”. Epistemology include both inner logic and outer validity. Author Billings explained this by describing the difference between “literature” and “folklore”. The literatures written by the minorities are very likely to be identified as the “folklore” category as they are always seen to be less talented than the whites, and the society naturally downgrade their

The Justice system seeks to prevent crimes and to capture those who have committed crimes. But what are the causes of crime, maybe poverty, or greed, or is sometimes caused by the system. Is the risk worth the reward and is reward the worth risking the punishment? Power and influence is threaded deeply into the Criminal Justice System. Are all offenders caught and processed with the same demeanor and given the same punishment? The system needs to be impartial to all offenders regardless of the offender’s social position, job or yearly income. The general punishment for most crimes is incarceration in most states with a difference in duration to adjust per each crime. This is the deterrent against crime. This is what should be keeping

As time goes by, ethical and moral issues have been brought up for long periods of time and these issues are recently becoming the rising problem to be discussed in society, business area and daily life. Most of people generally understand that the general meaning of ethics equals to the meaning of moral. However, moral is basically a matter of individual conscience without forcibleness, but ethics are related to social system with forcibleness. The academic definition of ethics is described as a stem of philosophy which raises moral questions and is demonstrated what is the main characteristic of morality and the way in which moral standards are decided (Gray & Webb, 2010).

Clifford (1879) is a strong proponent of proof-based beliefs and of the continuous criticism of beliefs held backed by loose evidence. In order to advance as a fair and just society, our beliefs must be evaluated and supported by evidence which is fair and just, and not by apparent truisms which satisfy our personal power struggles, insecurities, and lack of interest.

In American society, justice is blind. Justice is commonly defined as a rightful or lawful act. Or in other terms to bring to justice, to come before a court for trial or to receive punishment for one’s misdeeds. Some believe it is fairly administered and equal. But lack within the criminal justice system make us question equality. There are two individual aspects of how justice can be served; the perspective of the victim and the perspective of the criminal "per say". I will be focusing on instances in which wrongfully people were punished for crimes they didn 't commit and families or victims thought justice was served. The first case in which justice was wrongfully served is the case of Louis Taylor. Louis Taylor did forty-one years to life for something he didn 't do. Secondly, Steven Avery served eighteen years for being wrongfully convicted for rape. Although in Avery 's case he was exonerated through DNA testing.

The term justice is used in some of America's most treasured and valued documents, from the Pledge of Allegiance, to the Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence. Everyone wants to be treated justly whether it's in the courtroom or the local bar. Most people would feel confident giving a definition for justice, but would it be a definition we could universally agree to? Given that justice is a very common term, and something we all want, it's important to have a precise definition. For hundreds of years philosophers have argued, debated, and fought over this topic. Justice can clearly be defined as the intention to conform to truth and fairness. This is true justice.

The statement "It is better that 10 guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer" summarises and highlights the mistakes and injustices in the criminal justice system. In a just society, the innocent would never be charged, nor convicted, and the guilty would always be caught and punished. Unfortunately, it seems this would be impossible to achieve due to the society in which we live. Therefore, miscarriages of justice occur in the criminal justice system more frequently than is publicised or known to the public at large. They are routine and would have to be considered as a serious problem in our society. The law is what most people respect and abide by, if society cannot trust the law that governs them, then there will

own conscious awareness of it. An example of this prejudice that anyone can encounter in their

Why does God allow Satan to cause such tragedy in Job’s life, a man whom God has already acknowledged as “my servant Job, that there is none like on the earth, a blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil?”(1.8) From the beginning, it is known that Job is in no way deserving of his injustices, so a reason must be given. God gives Job an opportunity to prove that under any circumstances Job will still have faith. This simply a test for Job. The whole Book is a “double” journey for Job -- he shows God his faith and realizes the faith God has that Job will not stray from his path. Job knows deep down that God has not forsaken him.

There are a variety of different ethical systems that have developed of the course of millennia. However, even though the subject has been covered so thoroughly, it is still heavily debated. The varieties of ethical systems that are in existence look at various ethical problems from different perspectives and can be applied differently in different circumstances. Because of the subjective aspects to applying ethics, they can be as much an art as they are a science. Ethics are something that must be practiced and really cannot be perfected. In this way, studying ethics is a continual process that does not really stop. This paper will argue that ethics are the most important subject that an individual can pursue.

In Miranda Fricker’s article Testimonial Injustice, she highlights the significant effects for the connection of ethics and epistemology. Ethics is one of the philosophies’ branches that asks the question, “What is a good life or how to live a good life?” Epistemology is the theory of philosophy that ask the questions, “What do you know?” and “How do you know it?” Fricker basically, combines the two subjects at the matter and produced the concept of epistemic injustice. According to Fricker, epistemic injustices comes in the form of testimonial injustice.

Over the decades, the concept of justice has been continually evolving. This is occurring based upon different moral or legal interpretations. Evidence of this can be seen with observations from Burke (2011) who said, "Few things are of more importance to a society than its concept of justice. This is because it is justice that provides criterion for the legitimate use of force. In the name of justice people are detained, arrested, handcuffed, put on trial and punished. This concept is used to provide every society with some kind of social order. Over the last 200 years, a revolution has taken place with these principles. Our idea of it is what we employ, when dealing with ordinary individuals in daily life including: making agreements, paying bills, resolving disputes and putting criminals in jail. This is a concept that is as old as recorded history and it is familiar to people everywhere. What makes it so unique is that these ideas are constantly changing which focuses on society as a whole and how people are interacting with each other. " (Burke)

Communitarian critics of Rawls have argued that his A Theory of Justice provides an inadequate account of individuals in the original position. Michael Sandel, in Liberalism and the Limits of Justice argues that Rawls' conception of the person divorces any constitutive attachments that persons might have to their ends. Hence, Sandel asserts that Rawls privileges the standpoint of self-interested individuals at the expense of communal interests. I do not find Sandel's specific criticisms to be an accurate critique of what Rawls is doing in A Theory of Justice. However, this does not mean the more general thrust of the communitarian analysis of Rawls' conception of the person must be abandoned. By picking up the pieces

play in his opening speech. He sets the story that he is going to tell

Our conclusions on any occasion are direct consequences of any developed concept in our minds. We see the world as we want to see it through our personal perceptions. When we are categorizing anything as desirable or otherwise, we judge using the concepts that we hold to us. Although different concepts may shape different conclusions, they are all influenced by beliefs and experiences. So, to what extent do our beliefs modify the conclusions that we may reach? The knowledge obtained through out someone’s life through their experiences, or belief system direct decision making almost completely. In my essay I will explore how Ethics and Human sciences correlate with this topic. I will also implement and tie in the connections of Reason and link these concepts with belief and experiences.