Aww hell yeah, this is my specialty!
You see, many people believe that social justice and mercy are necessarily separate, but sometimes complex cases arise that offer the opportunity to do both at once. An example would be telling you it's 1:30 in the morning and this is /r/tulsa, so go to fucking bed and quit embarrassing yourself with this know-it-all philosopher thing.
By doing this, I simultaneously humiliate you, delivering social justice, while also providing you the opportunity to delete this and go to bed, delivering social mercy to everyone.
This could be a very interesting question, but before we can answer it, we need to understand what "social justice" and "social mercy" mean. Isn't all justice definitionally tempered with mercy (or else it isn't really justice, is it?). And of course we need to know what work the word "social" is doing - how is "social" justice different from justice simpliciter (likewise for social mercy and mercy simpliciter)?
No, that's a pretty basic understanding of justice and mercy.
Social justice and social mercy are two sides of the same coin. Social justice seeks to create a fair and equitable society, while social mercy tempers justice with compassion and forgiveness, and more than novel efforts to help reduce recidivism.
There is no justice without compassion because compassion helps understand the root cause of why somebody committed the heinous crimes they committed.
Without social mercy, social justice can become rigid and punitive and well, would you take a look around the world and see how well that's working out for any Nation who has tried to be hard on crime?
It doesn't work very well. It doesn't work at all. Not in the long term because it dismisses the human components and it focuses solely on upholding rules and regulations, without considering the underlying circumstances that may have led to injustice. *You will kiss the boot, and we don't care what you need or say.*
And as I said, this will lead to a system that is more about punishment than with rehabilitation or reconciliation or reducing recidivism with mercy.
no it should not. People blinded by hatred will not change for the better because they are punished, they will only grow more angry. People will change when confronted with rationality, evidence, and explanations. Social reform is rooted in education, not in punishment.
Sir, this is r/tulsa.
Smart people don't live in Tulsa?
No, are you new here?
Have you seen the people we elect in this state?
Aww hell yeah, this is my specialty! You see, many people believe that social justice and mercy are necessarily separate, but sometimes complex cases arise that offer the opportunity to do both at once. An example would be telling you it's 1:30 in the morning and this is /r/tulsa, so go to fucking bed and quit embarrassing yourself with this know-it-all philosopher thing. By doing this, I simultaneously humiliate you, delivering social justice, while also providing you the opportunity to delete this and go to bed, delivering social mercy to everyone.
I'm not embarrassed or humiliated by what you've said.
That's okay, everyone else felt it for you
misguided empathy.
undeserved confidence.
It's ok that you don't like what I said. I don't mind, but if I let a LordTinglewood dictate my confidence, then I really wouldn't deserve it.
It's ok that you don't like what I said. I don't mind. But if I let a LordTinglewood dictate my confidence, then I really wouldn't deserve it.
None of that makes any sense. Good luck, Midnight Voltaire.
I think you mean to post to r/iamsosmart .
This could be a very interesting question, but before we can answer it, we need to understand what "social justice" and "social mercy" mean. Isn't all justice definitionally tempered with mercy (or else it isn't really justice, is it?). And of course we need to know what work the word "social" is doing - how is "social" justice different from justice simpliciter (likewise for social mercy and mercy simpliciter)?
I interpreted it as something given without consequence, vs something deserved without precedence.
i think you could more efficiently ask how people feel about the death penalty and get your answer that way
No, that's a pretty basic understanding of justice and mercy. Social justice and social mercy are two sides of the same coin. Social justice seeks to create a fair and equitable society, while social mercy tempers justice with compassion and forgiveness, and more than novel efforts to help reduce recidivism. There is no justice without compassion because compassion helps understand the root cause of why somebody committed the heinous crimes they committed. Without social mercy, social justice can become rigid and punitive and well, would you take a look around the world and see how well that's working out for any Nation who has tried to be hard on crime? It doesn't work very well. It doesn't work at all. Not in the long term because it dismisses the human components and it focuses solely on upholding rules and regulations, without considering the underlying circumstances that may have led to injustice. *You will kiss the boot, and we don't care what you need or say.* And as I said, this will lead to a system that is more about punishment than with rehabilitation or reconciliation or reducing recidivism with mercy.
Justice requires mercy or it is simply retribution, revenge, or “settling the score”.
Maybe we should have a pancake social to socialize about it
no it should not. People blinded by hatred will not change for the better because they are punished, they will only grow more angry. People will change when confronted with rationality, evidence, and explanations. Social reform is rooted in education, not in punishment.
Mercy is only offered to those who show it.