Difference between revisions of "Justice 2013"

Revision as of 11:07, 26 August 2013

8.21.13

Define justice. Jake Nyquist: a decision that contributes to the general well-being of society
Crech: utilitarianism
Sam Elkins: a system of punishment to make bad people not do bad things, implemented by the people in power
Celia Lewis: an idea or ideology that brings people to the same playing field, but doesn't necessarily make it fair
Max Melcher: whose justice?
Clay Hatcher: consequences to make things fair, implemented by the leaders of society (fair = equal)
Will: a system of laws implemented to provide a safe and regulated society
Jack Kaplan: proportional punishment for a crime, implemented by some sort of judicial system

Is the world of Clockwork Orange a just system? Yes: IIIIIIII No: IIIIIIIIII
Not everyone agrees on what is right or moral, so the problem with Sam's definition of justice is that someone has to decide what is wrong or right. Jake's answer avoids the issue by allowing for actions that are either "good" or "bad", as long as they contribute to the well-being of society. Celia's definition explicitly states that justice isn't necessarily fair. A legal system can ensure equality of one of two things, opportunity or outcome, and Celia's definition states that justice is (or should be) focused on equality of opportunity - the "level playing field".
To create a civil society where definitions of morality differ, a system of laws is necessary to ensure that everyone plays by the same rules. Moreover, you also need an enforcer to enforce or formalize those rules, to ensure that people abide by the rules, even if they don't agree with them. The more nearly homogeneous a society is, the better it will function without a lot of rules. For example, even though the youth society and the adult society in Clockwork Orange are relatively internally homogeneous, it is the clash between them that causes the central conflict in the book.

What is needed to create a good, functioning society?

• Enforcer

Handbook--Either you accept the handbook rules, you don't care about them, or you don't feel that they apply, based on your prior experience with those rules (do you care about the rules if your teacher doesn't?). Most of the handbook rules don't concern most people or are common courtesy.

Unwritten rules + traditions (learned, so they differ from person to person, because of personality, environment, etc.)

We have rules so that we can demonstrate what happens when we break them. (?)

08.23.13

Chaplain: most moral, but ineffectual: “forced good” < “chosen evil”

Prison: totally amoral, pragmatic approach to the Ludovico treatment

External (both parties)—election or re-election ploy

World view:

How do you have to look at justice if you feel CO is a just world? • Pragmatic • Focused on society • Utilitarian

If you consider it’s unjust, you might be concerned with “fairness” or morality

August 26 The most striking thing about the first chapter is that he is arrested but it does not change his life at all. We are really reading a combined effort because it is a translated work, so we are getting the translators interpretation of the original work. The interpretation comes from: a) Word Choice: some words don't exist in other languages, few words are actually interchangeable in English. b) The humor changes between languages due to cultural differences. c) Syntax can be very different, i.e. in German the main verb comes at the end of the sentence d) The paragraphs are very long in The Trial e) The idioms in languages vary, and do not translate

Another striking thing about the first chapter is that "someone must have been telling lies". Dwight on board: Modal Verbs transitive and intransitive verbs

                     auxiliary verbs- modal verbs is a subclass (ie the mood), ie would go, might go, must go
                     analytic verbs
                     synthetic- make tenses by adding verbs

Transitive verbs have direct objects, intransitive verbs do not have direct objects.

Back to "someone must have been telling lies" There is no doubt about it in the writers mind. Implies people are normally arrested after they have done something wrong. Therefore, there is some problem with the Justice in this case. This is important because it sets up the mood of the book with respect to the notion of Justice in the book. Also: someone had to mess with the system to make this happen.

The view is that only the bad will be punished and the good will not be. We supposedly share this view in the US currently. Justice breaks down because people lie.

The arresting officers are introduced on the second and third pages, who interestingly do not know why he is being arrested but assure him that his arrest will have no impact on his life. K. tries to talk the inspector out of arresting him, but this does not work. K. is very arrogant at the beginning, and feels that he should not have to deal with these problems. His arrogance comes from position and intellect, but not wealth. The narrator appears to be on K.'s side, we are getting his perspective. K. clearly cares more about himself than other people: he fails to notice the people from work. Why does it not give K's last name? This gives a more general or universal message, this is less specific. Because there is a discussion of a verdict of innocence, the justice system clearly does not assume the accused is innocent. This is the exact opposite of "our" justice system. At the end of the chapter: K. has a very unusual sense of perspective. He is also introspective because he thinks about his own feelings instead of what is actually going on.