Your Purpose in Life

Originally posted by FMF
If your "perfect justice" has no relevance whatsoever to "justice", or there is absolutely nothing from it that can be applied, emulated, replicated, or lessons of principle from it that can be learned, then why on earth are you attaching the words "justice" and "perfect" to it? I know full well why you have been dodging the question. If we were to seek to emula ...[text shortened]... "perfect justice" you propagate, we would create the most depraved system of justice imaginable.

How would you know what was relevant to 'justice' if there were no universal standard of justice?

Originally posted by FMF
Not exactly. [1] what you describe doesn't exist, AND [2] it doesn't make moral sense anyway.

Surely to the people (like myself) that believe in it, [1] it does exist, and [2] it does make moral sense.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Where does the Bible say that slavery is good?

I don't know, does it? You tell me. My point is that your insistence that standards pertaining to what is morally sound and not morally sound somehow do not change over time if there is a "universally correct system" in place is clearly not something that the ancient folklore and mythology [that you just so happen to subscribe to] substantiates.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Surely to the people (like myself) that believe in it, [1] it does exist, and [2] it does make moral sense.

Be that as it may, but it doesn't lend any credibility to what you claim.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
How would you know what was relevant to 'justice' if there were no universal standard of justice?

I have already answered this question over and over and over again. Have you really forgotten? Justice is a concept and system devised, established, administered, refined, and adapted by societies, and it has a long history of diversity and change. There is no "universal standard of justice" You have not demonstrated that there is one.

Originally posted by FMF
I have already answered this question over and over and over again. Have you really forgotten? Justice is a concept and system devised, established, administered, refined, and adapted by societies, and it has a long history of diversity and change. There is no "universal standard of justice" You have not demonstrated that there is one.

But each society has a different version of what they view to be 'justice' and so do you. So what makes your view or any other societies view of justice any more relevant than mine? One view can only be more relevant than another view if there is a universal standard of justice. This has been repeated to you over and over again. Yet somehow you can't seem to fathom it.

Originally posted by FMF
Be that as it may, but it doesn't lend any credibility to what you claim.

Not surprising, since from your perspective no ones view can more credible than anyone else's. Yet still you pretend that your view is somehow more credible.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
But each society has a different version of what they view to be 'justice' and so do you. So what makes your view or any other societies view of justice any more relevant than mine? One view can only be more relevant than another view if there is a universal standard of justice. This has been repeated to you over and over again. Yet somehow you can't seem to fathom it.

Of course I can fathom what you are saying. But there is no "universal standard of justice" that you are able to show to me, or to present as something credibly described as "perfect". The only "universal standard of justice" you have cited is the product of your superstitions - it involves a supernatural being - and you are unable to point to a single instance of it in action, except in your imagination. Meanwhile, I have ample evidence demonstrating and substantiating my contention that each society has a different version of what they view to be justice and that there clearly isn't "universal standard of justice".

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Not surprising, since from your perspective no ones view can more credible than anyone else's. Yet still you pretend that your view is somehow more credible.

I am completely sincere and honest when I say that I think my view of what constitutes justice is more credible than yours. I am not pretending at all. For you to claim that my perspective is that "no one's view can more credible than anyone else's" is false. My view is more credible than yours, and I reckon I have demonstrated it to be.

Originally posted by FMF
Of course I can fathom what you are saying. But there is no "universal standard of justice" that you are able to show to me, or to present as something credibly described as "perfect". The only "universal standard of justice" you have cited is the product of your superstitions - it involves a supernatural being - and you are unable to point to a single instance ...[text shortened]... on of what they view to be justice and that there clearly isn't "universal standard of justice".

How would you even know what can be credibly described as perfect and what can't?

The only way you could know is if there was a perfect justice system that you were acquainted with. But you already assume there isn't. So you have a mental block on to start with.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
How would you even know what can be credibly described as perfect and what can't?

The only way you could know is if there was a perfect justice system that you were acquainted with. But you already assume there isn't. So you have a mental block on to start with.

If there is a "perfect justice system that you are acquainted with" and that you can demonstrate is superior and more credible than what I have put forward and described ~ where people all over the world can just see for themselves that it exists and is "real", and that it makes sense and is fair, so they can believe it, and believe that it is, in fact, "universal" ~ just feel free to go ahead and do so.

Originally posted by FMF
I am completely sincere and honest when I say that I think my view of what constitutes justice is more credible than yours. I am not pretending at all. For you to claim that my perspective is that "no one's view can more credible than anyone else's" is false. My view is more credible than yours, and I reckon I have demonstrated it to be.

Feel free to explain to me how your view can objectively be more credible than mine assuming there is no universally correct justice system to assess our views by.

Originally posted by FMF
If there is a "perfect justice system that you are acquainted with" and that you can demonstrate is superior and more credible than what I have put forward and described ~ where people all over the world can just see for themselves that it exists and is "real", and that it makes sense and is fair, so they can believe it, and believe that it is, in fact, "universal" ~ just feel free to go ahead and do so.

You dodged my question. I asked you 'How would you even know what can be credibly described as perfect and what can't?'

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Feel free to explain to me how your view can objectively be more credible than mine assuming there is no universally correct justice system to assess our views by.

Asked and answered. Ad nauseam. I don't accept your premise that there is a "universally correct justice system", as I have explained repeatedly. I don't accept your obvious intent which is to contend that you are right and I am wrong because you insist that your half-baked, ludicrous notions are backed by your unilaterally declared "universally correct justice system". You've asked me the same question over and over again. And I have answered it. Do you really not remember?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
You dodged my question. I asked you 'How would you even know what can be credibly described as perfect and what can't?'

But I haven't claimed that anything is "perfect". It's you who has.