Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Your analogy is flawed. I believe that the world owes me a comfortable living, where I am king. However, my belief will do nothing to change the reality of life for me. Justice is what our society and the people in it believe is just. Societies administer justice and they don't particularly care about one individual's beliefs about fonts. And as a practical matter, many types of philosophies have converged on some common social norms.
What about other societies? They also choose what is just for them. And, yes, societies do not always care about what individuals believe about justice. Can you live with the consequences of the materialist view of justice?
Well of course. Sometimes we have boycotts and wars and international aid and war crimes tribunals for exactly that reason.
The question is not whether I can live with it. We don't get to have universal justice merely because we really, really want it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wouldn't "justice" happen when that student appeals to the professor's superiors and gets a grade change and the teacher is chastised or fired for grading like that?
Indeed. But that would involve a...Higher Authority.[/quote
I think atheists believe that people have employers. And that countries have laws and police forces and jails.
PPs are still thinking in terms of justice that involve the legal system, or other closed systems. But a great deal of human behavior falls outside of the authority of these systems. And even within these systems, injustice persists. I think this is self-evident, but I will give one small example.
Recently, the Post published a lengthy story about a man who had been falsely accused of child molestation. The story detailed how his life had been destroyed by the accusations, and the process of clearing his name, which continues. He lost his job, his income, the respect of friends and neighbors, all the time and anguish and worry and humiliation...his entire life would never be the same. And he was innocent, completely innocent.
If materialism is right, and this material universe is all that there is, that injustice is permanent and total. His one shot at life was messed up. There is no way to undo it. It happened in time and space. It is what it is. Even with all the safeguards our society has in place, injustice will happen, on matters large and small.
So we are back here again:
Humans seek justice (through the legal system, through their own work making the world a better place).
But there is great injustice in this life. (Despite our best efforts, evil does well and good suffers.)
So justice cannot be found in this life.
Either #1 justice is found in something beyond this life, or #2 justice is simply not met by reality.
Unbelievers reject #1. The material world is all there is.
Then they fall into two camps on #2. There are the very depressing SOL unbelievers who say, yep! No such thing as actual, ultimate, perfect justice. You'd need God for that, and that's just wishful thinking. Sucks, doesn't it?
Then there are the hopeful nonbelievers who say, look, it's OK, we can make our own justice here, in this life. We can have social contracts and base them on reason. We can show people the benefits of being nice to one another, honoring our promises, and telling the truth. And we can do all this on our own. There are no ultimate standards, but the ones we come up with will be excellent, because we are smart and of good will for our fellow man.
I am trying to detail the problems with the second line of thinking.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wouldn't "justice" happen when that student appeals to the professor's superiors and gets a grade change and the teacher is chastised or fired for grading like that?
Indeed. But that would involve a...Higher Authority.
I think atheists believe that people have employers. And that countries have laws and police forces and jails.
Right, but where does this "authority" that judges and police officers claim to have come from if not from the Ultimate Authority??![]()
I swear, sometimes it's as though the 18th century never happened.
(Fixed the quote thing)
Are you trying to hint that England is the "Ultimate Authority"? Please see: American History for details of the formation of our executive and legislative branches of government.

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Your analogy is flawed. I believe that the world owes me a comfortable living, where I am king. However, my belief will do nothing to change the reality of life for me. Justice is what our society and the people in it believe is just. Societies administer justice and they don't particularly care about one individual's beliefs about fonts. And as a practical matter, many types of philosophies have converged on some common social norms.
What about other societies? They also choose what is just for them. And, yes, societies do not always care about what individuals believe about justice. Can you live with the consequences of the materialist view of justice?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wouldn't "justice" happen when that student appeals to the professor's superiors and gets a grade change and the teacher is chastised or fired for grading like that?
Indeed. But that would involve a...Higher Authority.
I think atheists believe that people have employers. And that countries have laws and police forces and jails.
Right, but where does this "authority" that judges and police officers claim to have come from if not from the Ultimate Authority??![]()
I swear, sometimes it's as though the 18th century never happened.
(Fixed the quote thing)
Anonymous wrote:
Let's say there is a completely isolated village. A powerful general and his men come across it, and decide they would like to set up camp there. So they lob a bomb into the village in the middle of the night, killing everyone instantaneously. The villagers never knew what hit them.
Is that justice, or injustice? Or is there no such thing as justice, because we are material beings who did not exist before conception and do not exist after death?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Your analogy is flawed. I believe that the world owes me a comfortable living, where I am king. However, my belief will do nothing to change the reality of life for me. Justice is what our society and the people in it believe is just. Societies administer justice and they don't particularly care about one individual's beliefs about fonts. And as a practical matter, many types of philosophies have converged on some common social norms.
What about other societies? They also choose what is just for them. And, yes, societies do not always care about what individuals believe about justice. Can you live with the consequences of the materialist view of justice?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wouldn't "justice" happen when that student appeals to the professor's superiors and gets a grade change and the teacher is chastised or fired for grading like that?
Indeed. But that would involve a...Higher Authority.
I think atheists believe that people have employers. And that countries have laws and police forces and jails.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wouldn't "justice" happen when that student appeals to the professor's superiors and gets a grade change and the teacher is chastised or fired for grading like that?
Indeed. But that would involve a...Higher Authority.[/quote
I think atheists believe that people have employers. And that countries have laws and police forces and jails.
Right, but where does this "authority" that judges and police officers claim to have come from if not from the Ultimate Authority??![]()
I swear, sometimes it's as though the 18th century never happened.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wouldn't "justice" happen when that student appeals to the professor's superiors and gets a grade change and the teacher is chastised or fired for grading like that?
Indeed. But that would involve a...Higher Authority.[/quote
I think atheists believe that people have employers. And that countries have laws and police forces and jails.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP: your argument that god exists because without him, there's no objective justice, which would suck:
"I'm thirsty, therefore, there must be a glass of water."
I like that!
But I already put aside that argument as the nonbelievers' derisive "argument from wishful thinking."
What I am focusing on now is that nonbelievers have a problem. There is a high price to pay for materialism, which excludes absolute and objective justice.
We have used several examples based on murder, but justice has to do with far more mundane and quiet things in life. Let's use a different example:
A college professor of ethics gave his students a term paper. The assignment was to write about any ethical topic of her choice, backed up by reasons and proper documentation.
One student wrote eloquently on the topic of moral relativism. She argued there is no such thing as objective truth in morality, no absolute and perfect justice. Her paper was well-written, neat, documented, the proper length, and submitted on time.
When the paper was returned, a huge F was at the top, with one comment: I DON'T LIKE TIMES NEW ROMAN!
Furious, she went to office hours to complain. "This is so unfair! So what about the font! I did the assignment exactly as you asked!"
The professor asked, "Do you really believe there is no such thing as objective truth in morality, no absolute and perfect justice?"
She said, "Yes, that is what I believe."
So the professor said, "I can respect that. I don't like Times New Roman. You get an F!"
We can see our belief in true justice by the way we react to others. Justice does not describe how we actually behave, but it prescribes how we ought to behave.
Anonymous wrote:Wouldn't "justice" happen when that student appeals to the professor's superiors and gets a grade change and the teacher is chastised or fired for grading like that?

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP: your argument that god exists because without him, there's no objective justice, which would suck:
"I'm thirsty, therefore, there must be a glass of water."
I like that!
But I already put aside that argument as the nonbelievers' derisive "argument from wishful thinking."
What I am focusing on now is that nonbelievers have a problem. There is a high price to pay for materialism, which excludes absolute and objective justice.
We have used several examples based on murder, but justice has to do with far more mundane and quiet things in life. Let's use a different example:
A college professor of ethics gave his students a term paper. The assignment was to write about any ethical topic of her choice, backed up by reasons and proper documentation.
One student wrote eloquently on the topic of moral relativism. She argued there is no such thing as objective truth in morality, no absolute and perfect justice. Her paper was well-written, neat, documented, the proper length, and submitted on time.
When the paper was returned, a huge F was at the top, with one comment: I DON'T LIKE TIMES NEW ROMAN!
Furious, she went to office hours to complain. "This is so unfair! So what about the font! I did the assignment exactly as you asked!"
The professor asked, "Do you really believe there is no such thing as objective truth in morality, no absolute and perfect justice?"
She said, "Yes, that is what I believe."
So the professor said, "I can respect that. I don't like Times New Roman. You get an F!"
We can see our belief in true justice by the way we react to others. Justice does not describe how we actually behave, but it prescribes how we ought to behave.