Law is derived from logic and experience.
It has rules to govern its application, penalties for its violation, and remedies for those aggrieved.
Yet it tends to be slow, unpredictable, unnecessarily complicated at times, and selectively enforced at others.
And then there are the paradoxes that make law even more enigmatic.
1 When entities within justice make a mistake
- When a picture is painted on paper that is simply not possible in reality;
- justice derails;
- justice enters the danger zone;
- toxic improper use arises;
- unimaginable perverse abuse;
- dysfunctions – an abhorrent improper event that strikes a person to their core from out of nowhere;
- structural dysfunctions in justice are a contradiction in terms…
Sometimes justice doesn’t amount to much, for example, ‘The blind leading the blind’. Someone can effortlessly undermine and disrupt justice, turning it into a dead end street!
Deceiving justice with established tangible absurdities is surreal. This tends towards fraudulent justice, doesn’t it?
That someone can convince justice of the most absurd lies goes against common sense.
The kind of justice that gets caught up in this is meaningless.
2 It seems like a philosophical statement
- There is a paradox in justice.
- Justice deals with things that do not exist.
- Justice is opposed to what is inherently part of life.
- Justice is opposite to the law of nature.
- Justice versus conscience (the title of the website).
- The essence disappears: a foundation of ordinary honesty.
- There is a gap where justice becomes a substitute for abject consciencelessness!
Some key points associated with natural law theory are:
- It assumes that there is an objective, natural order to the universe that can be discovered through reason and observation.
- It suggests that certain actions are inherently right or wrong based on their conformity to this natural order.
- It often emphasizes the importance of individual rights and freedoms as a reflection of the natural order of things.
Justice does things that are completely absurd.
It is something to worry about.
It is why this website is under construction.
An endless string of people in pain and horror behind bars,
because justice is not working.
Even children, like The Central Five,
just 14 years old, innocent in prison.
It was abhorrant and it shouldn’t have happened.
Even on the electric chair,
like George Stinney, a boy only 14.
Such a thing is incomprehensible.
Een paradox is een uitspraak die niet overeenstemt met de gangbare mening.
A paradox is a statement that disagrees with common opinion.
A statement that seems to contradict itself, but reveals a deeper truth through its contradiction.
Where there is no law, there is no freedom (John Locke)
Cowards die many times before their deaths (Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar)
a situation or statement that seems impossible or is difficult to understand because it contains two opposite facts or characteristics
a statement or situation that may be true but seems impossible or difficult to understand because it contains two opposite facts or characteristics
A paradox is a statement or situation that appears to be self-contradictory or absurd but may, in fact, be true. The key points of a paradox include:
Contradiction: A paradox involves a contradiction or a conflict between two or more ideas, concepts, or statements.
Apparent truth: A paradox often appears to be true or logical, despite the contradiction it contains.
Surprise: A paradox can be surprising or unexpected, as it challenges our assumptions or common sense.
Irony: Paradoxes can be ironic because they often involve a reversal of expectations or outcomes.
Resolving the contradiction: A paradox can be resolved by finding a deeper truth or a different perspective that reconciles the apparent contradiction.
Philosophical value: Paradoxes often have philosophical significance, as they can shed light on fundamental questions about reality, knowledge, and human nature.
Overall, a paradox can be a powerful tool for exploring complex ideas, challenging assumptions, and deepening our understanding of the world around us.
“The Justice Paradox” is a book written by Joshua Greene, a philosopher and cognitive scientist, that explores the challenges and complexities of moral decision-making and justice from a cognitive and psychological perspective. Some key points of “The Justice Paradox” include:
Dual Process Theory: Greene proposes that moral decision-making involves two cognitive processes – a fast, automatic, emotional process (referred to as “Type 1”) and a slow, deliberative, reasoning process (referred to as “Type 2”). He argues that these two processes often conflict with each other, leading to moral dilemmas and paradoxes.
Moral Dilemmas: Greene uses moral dilemmas, such as the famous trolley problem, to illustrate how our moral intuitions can vary depending on the framing of the situation and the emotional responses triggered by different scenarios. He suggests that our intuitions are often guided by emotional reactions, rather than logical reasoning.
Moral Tribalism: Greene discusses how moral decision-making is often influenced by social and tribal factors, such as group identity, political affiliation, and cultural norms. He argues that our moral judgments are often biased and shaped by our social context, leading to conflicts and contradictions in our sense of justice.
Utilitarianism vs. Deontology: Greene explores the tension between utilitarianism, which emphasizes the greatest good for the greatest number of people, and deontology, which emphasizes moral rules and duties regardless of the consequences. He suggests that these two moral frameworks often clash, creating moral dilemmas and paradoxes.
Neuroscience and Moral Decision-making: Greene draws on insights from neuroscience to understand how the brain processes moral information and how emotions, intuitions, and reasoning interact in moral decision-making. He argues that understanding the neural mechanisms underlying moral judgments can shed light on the nature of justice and moral paradoxes.
Practical Implications: Greene discusses the implications of his research for practical issues such as criminal justice, political decision-making, and moral education. He suggests that a deeper understanding of the cognitive and psychological processes underlying moral decision-making can inform policy and help us navigate the complexities of justice in a more nuanced and informed way.
Overall, “The Justice Paradox” challenges traditional notions of justice and morality, and explores the complexities and contradictions inherent in our moral decision-making processes, shedding light on the interplay between emotions, intuitions, reasoning, and social factors in shaping our sense of justice.
1 Fouten bij justitie, wie controleert het Openbaar Ministerie?
11 nov. 2019
2 The Dark Side of UK Justice – Miscarriage of Justice
12 jun. 2020
Article De Standaard 21 May 2016 pdf and link to De Standaard see lower
3 Who thinks too much about the impact of rulings written too quickly, goes crazy’.
Are we still a constitutional state worthy of the name?
What is really going on behind the scenes of Belgian justice? We went in search of the answer to a fundamental question: can judges still rule properly in this country? Are we still a constitutional state worthy of the name? The answer is appalling: no.
In the busy sections of our courts of first instance, it is bubbling over. Take the juvenile court in Antwerp, where each juvenile court judge looks after an average of 450 children and young people. Too many to be good’, says youth judge Philippe Vandaele. It tends towards assembly-line work, it is said in many courts.
The bar is inevitably lowered. The quality of judgments is declining, judges admit – although no one wants to go so far as to say that they no longer trust their own judgments. Sometimes I think: this could have been done better’, says a promising judge from Ghent. You make decisions that have a great impact on people’s lives. If you dwell on that too much, you go crazy.’
Mistakes are made. Many more than allowed, …
3 Japan: Guilty Until Proven Innocent | 101 East
6 okt. 2016
4 How Bad Lawyers Get Rich Off People in Houston Jails
5 Peter’s journey through our broken criminal justice system
29 jan. 2019
M.a.w. dit is de justitie paradox vernoemd in punt 2