What is the difference between revenge and justice
Revenge is subjective, justice is objective.
revenge is justice without mercy
Justice is a broader concept, it doesn't necessarily involve punishmnent.
>>497480
revenge works on impulse, it a kind of emotional need, justice is a set of concepts
Loosely speaking, revenge is one-upsmanship or retaliation perpetrated by feelings. Someone did you a wrong, so to save dignity or face you must now do them a wrong.
Justice is a wider net that looks only to rectify the wrong or prevent the wrong from happening again. This includes deterrence (general or specific), incarceration (segregating the wrong-doer from society), retribution (society's revenge, more or less), and rehabilitation (fixing the wrongdoer so he can operate normally).
So, justice is generally forward-looking (especially utilitarian theories) whereas revenge is backward-looking. Justice focuses on the just response in order that the future will be better; revenge focuses on the wrong and the indignity or loss caused thereby and seeks to make the wrongdoer get their "just deserts" for it.
You can't call yourself empathic without being vegan. Simple.
>>497607
Had you siad vegetarian your argument would be sufficient to initiate an actual debate
>>497607
You are killing poor innocent plants you monster
>>497607
http://www.smithsonianchannel.com/videos/do-plants-respond-to-pain/12151
>>497665
actually you're not, the plant stil lives when you pick up their fruits
Same thing. Most societies saw justice even via governments as revenge and explicitly referred to it as such. I.E. the various Christian rites for the coronation of a monarch included prayers that he might take vengeance upon the wicked. This included both his right to administer justice and his right to prosecute wars.
Making a distinction where one is good and one is bad, IMO, is self-congratulatory masturbation to make us feel more enlightened than societies which took retribution more seriously than our society where rich kids can kill four people and get probation.
Empathy doesn't determine your morals or personal establishment of right from wrong.
>>497679
OH MY GOD
I LITERALLY CAN'T
UGH I CAN'T EVEN
DO YOU SHIT IN THE WOODS? YOU ROB THE POOR PLANTS FRUIT AND DON'T SPREAD IT
FUCKING SHITLORD
>>497679
We should cut off legs of animals and eat those but let the animals live.
>>497701
that would be cruel, you just need to harvest their milk dude, calm down, and eat old animals
>>497705
Classically justice referred primarily to retribution.
Revenge is usually personal matter.
Justice is usually a formal matter.
They both attempt to "right the wrongs." Only difference is the formalization of the process.
>>497480
Actually even if you're not acquiring your "morals" from religion you're acquiring them from somewhere--some cultural values instilled in you that you pick up from the way people around you behave or the like. Those will determine whether you feel what you are doing is wrong and whether the empathy trigger in your brain activates. Remember, the Aztecs thought it was perfectly fine to cut out people's hearts to keep the sun coming up, few batted an eye at slavery in the ancient world--not even prophets and clerics, and in WW2 carpet bombing civilian homes was just something everybody did.
>>497726
>retribution is only "just" when the two people get even
so you want capital punishement by the state ?
Is mercy unjust?
>>497726
Nice opinion. But etymologically there's no real distinction.
For example Romans 13:4 is "justice" by your definition and usually translated as such because it refers to the actions of authority figures. Romans 12:19 is usually translated as vengeance because it refers to the actions of individuals. But it's the same word in Greek.
>>497699
BUR, it is in fact an appropriate counter arguement.
yes http://www.antiquitas.lv/the-history-of-an-idea/
>>497792
im sorry, wrong thread
>>497480
justice is revenge from society, country, god, etc.
it is the whole against its parts rather than just some thing against some other thing.
>>497480
Justice sound better, other than that, none.
>>497480
revenge is personal and petty
justice promotes social order, protection of the community and their values
>>497663
Nope. Vegetarians still consume eggs for example and the egg industry kills male chickens because you can't profit from them. Same with cows/milk and so on. So vegetarians are still responsible for animal suffering.
>>497665
>>497677
http://fcmconference.org/img/CambridgeDeclarationOnConsciousness.pdf
Plants don't have a nerve center and therefore may react to "pain" but it can't actually feel them.
PLUS: it takes much more plants to feed livestock than to feed humans. So you will have like hundreds of kilos of plants for 1kg meat and not just 1kg of plants for 1kg of food.
>>497480
Religion is a considerable aid in such matters.
>>497607
Vegan casts too wide of a net since you're also including various products won from insect labor even when it is to the benefit of insects (Beekeeping)
Why is revenge bad again? Seems perfectly fine to me if it's legitimate.
>>498905
Well, people are stealing the bee's honey. I wouldn't like if someone stole the money I worked for either. And bees are often left to die after their honey has been taken away. But I get your point. Why not breed bees for nature's sake without stealing their honey? And I think the advantages of veganism are still worth much more. Just because people eat meat doesn't mean it's good for bees either.
>>498955
Beekeeping is generally good for bees and these also produce a surplus of honey. There is no particular need to stick to breeding bees simply for the sake of nature, provided one does so in an ethical manner since this is likely not always the case.
That and there are likely to be quite a few cases where animal products are included without outright providing that notice such as with apples (shellac).
Keep in mind that I'm not saying that you can't make ethical judgements about other people for what they consume if it is produced in an unethical manner and if you are so inclined but the broader blanket of veganism is fairly meaningless if you just generally state the use and consumption of all insect and animal products as unethical.
>>498924
>if it's legitimate
And who determines this? What exactly are the grounds for vengeance? What would be sufficient recompense?
It's a slippery slope that's left up to the eye of the beholder.
Justice is better on principle.
If free will doesn't exist then why are people punished?
>>499187
Because punishment as a deterrant or forced rehabilitation are factors that can impact what other people do and can change their behavior as a result.
Not including either might have a negative impact on society so one should still act under the pretense of free will not being an illusion even if this is not the case.
It's like how you wouldn't just consume anything off the ground or some other unsavory surface even if it could be argued that the surface of your skin which handles the food is likely coated in bacteria and filth anyway.
