Society Is A Unjust Society

My belief has always been that the very idea of social justice is evil. Justice is one of the greatest ideals ever to exist. It is the idea that what goes around, comes around, in a more technical term. It means that if you act just, in behavior and treatment, you will be treated accordingly, and that if you are a criminal, you will be prosecuted for your wrong-doing. Once you add a precursor to a concept inherently good, you run the risk of perverting the ideal. Correctness itself, the idea that there is falsehood, a difference between right and wrong, correct and incorrect, is a fantastic thing. It means that there is a difference between fact and opinion. Once you add political to it, it perverts it, making it as much an attempt at virtue

A just society defines a country where people have an equal opportunity to success and to achieve their goals. It is a country where people are equal and their cultural heritage, religious, and language rights are supported and respected. Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau had a goal to make Canada a just society. Canada achieved its goal of becoming a just society because of Collective rights, Civil rights, and Human rights.

What makes something “just” or “unjust?” Would it be possible for people to creating a “fair” society?

What is justice? According to Socrates, to be just is what every individual is conditioned to strive for. Those who act unjustly are guided by ignorance and only they themselves believe they are doing good. A core ideal of Socrates was that everyone should do good and avoid wrong. His views on law and justice are shaped around this ideal.

The main reason so many people have become aware of the unjust system is because of the laws that have been imposed in certain districts. As if the registries are not open to the public, some governments seek more ways to broadcast a person's registry. A judge in a small town of Texas, ruled that sex offenders must post warning signs in the front yard of their homes reading "Danger! Registered Sex Offender Lives Here!" Not only did the judge expect these to be put on their yards but placed on their cars as well. Judge J. Manuel Bañales argued his case because although in Texas the registry is in the newspapers and online he says many people do not look at these. People against Bañales disagreed and said that if the people of the neighborhood

The idea then of a just society I contend, comes down to people living under a fair and common law, order, political system, social organization, as well as everyone having personal and political freedom.

In response to Thrasymachus, Glaucon, and Adeimantus, Socrates seeks to show that it is always in an individual’s interest to be just, rather than unjust. Thus, one of the most critical problems regarding the Republic is whether Socrates defends justice successfully or not. Socrates offers three arguments in favor of the just life over the unjust life: first, the just man is wise and good, and the unjust man is ignorant and bad; second, injustice produces internal disharmony which prevents effective actions; and lastly, virtue is excellence at a thing’s function and the just person lives a happier life than the unjust person, since he performs the various functions of the human soul well. Socrates is displeased with the argument because a sufficient explanation of justice is essential before reaching a conclusion as to whether or not the just life is better than the unjust life. He is asked to support justice for itself, not for the status that follows. He propositions to look for justice in the city first and then to continue by analogy to discover justice in the individual. This approach will allow for a distinct judgment on the question of whether the just person is happier than the unjust person. Socrates commences by exploring the roots of political life and constructs a hypothetical just city that gratifies only fundamental human necessities. Socrates argues

Cephalus is the first to offer his definition of what is just. His definition can be summarized as being: justice is and means to live up to your legal obligations and to be honest. This seems like a good attempt to explain what it means to be just, however, Socrates soon easily refutes this. Socrates provides the thought provoking counter example, which provides the scenario of a man loans

To live in a place, where equality, peace, security and dignity are guaranteed is a good fortune to those who found a just society. Though it is not an easy task to establish a just society, but it is not an impossible idea. A just society requires a society of law abiding citizens who work together for the betterment of the society, where laws are human rights informed and social policies are effective.

An unjust man in Socrates view is a rich man. An unjust man is only happy on paper but is that real happiness. An unjust man always wants more than he can obtain, and tries to gain it, when he cannot he is disappointed. An unjust man will “be mean with their own money… but they’ll love to spend other people’s because of their appetites.”Plato divides the soul into two sections -reason, spirit/indignation and appetites/desires. The unjust person lets his indignation and desires rule and keeps reason on the sideline. Once one of those takes place of reason, the man is in a state of chaos and starts behaving unjustly. The more the appetite grows the more unhappy he becomes, being subjected to his desires. Socrates goes on to explain an unjust man by comparing different societies and shows how they all start from a just society. However, they become corrupted. This is explained while Socrates describes the transformation from a Timocracy government to an Oligarchy. Socrates explains how if a person were to “proceed further into money-making, the more they value it,” and the more they would be enslaved by it. Furthermore, Plato saves the worst society for last, Tyranny. Some people may consider them to be

Though the concept of social injustice is universal in nature, the experience varies with each person. Factors like a person’ race, or gender can further influence the severity of the injustice; victims caught in the overlap between discriminations often go unrecognized by the law and society. Many people recognize the names Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and Tamir Rice as African Americans who were murdered by local police. But names like Michelle Cusseaux, Tanish Anderson, and Meagan Hockaday often receive less feedback even though they are also murdered African Americans. The only distinction between the sets of names is gender. Even within racial injustice, discrimination is present between genders as some cases get national

Social justice is that status of the society where “equity” and “just treatment” of individuals exists. It is not limited to safeguarding the rights but also comes with responsibility to maintain a “society for all” providing equal opportunities. A socially just society can be achieved after examining the inequalities and seeking opportunity to curb the same by total elimination. The concept of social justice varies with the different philosophical approaches about the distribution or allocation of resources.

In this paper, I am going to argue that living a just life is more worthwhile than living an unjust life. I will do this with evidence provided from the text. The argument in question is why (given the advantages of living an unjust life) would anyone want to live a just life. This very question was a major debate that carried on during most of the text of The Republic of Plato. Throughout the text we see Socrates, Thrasymachus, Adeimantus and Glaucon take on this challenge. They thoroughly go through what they feel is just, and unjust. They also outline the benefits of living both types of ways. They take the various ideals discussed and pick them apart in every which way possible. There is no point of view that is brushed under the rug. After seeing the stance of several of the characters in this book, I see myself siding with Socrates on many levels. This challenge is taken on heavily and incorporated in many of the other concepts discussed within Socrates’ circle.

Justice is a word with more than one definition. To me, justice is treating everyone equally under well-known rules and laws. Fairness is a category of justice. In order for one to be just, they must first be fair. To be fair you must treat people with honesty and respect. Also, you must give everyone equivalent openings to succeed. To be just you must treat everyone with value. Everyone is unique, therefore you must value everyone and accept them for who they are. To be just you must know the laws and rules. Justice is peace and equality. If everyone acts in a just way, then everyone will have a chance to succeed. It is important to be just and fair to everyone in order to make with world a better place for everyone. There are many people who fought for justice such as Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks,Abraham Lincoln, Susan B. Anthony, etc.

In this article I will explain the life of Socrates as well as Marin Luther king and their approach towards changing the work. They took several measures in order to improve the lives of people but the worst thing is that there end was not good. They both died on the hands of injustice. I will also elaborate the topic of just and unjust law and how it is related to the unjust law. The main purpose of this article is tell people that believing in yourself is very important. Their approaches were not similar but their intentions were same. However there were many things which went against them during them during this process. Also we will look over the nature and form of social justice and its solution. Is there any way we can response to those various instances of social injustice. What are unjust law and