justice and violence

【Force without justice is violence】

"Power without justice is violence, justice without power is powerless."

This is a famous quote from a legendary oriental karate master.

In this world today, "violence" that makes you want to cover your eyes is rampant.

Large powers invade small countries, dictators oppress people, abuse small children and women...

Whatever the reason may be, it should never be forgiven.

The "strong" beating the "weak".

This is "violence".

"Justice" is neither "strong" nor "weak."

However, the karateka probably wanted to say that "weak justice" cannot stand up to "strong violence", so we should be strong.

However, even in the case of "justice," the "strong" hits the "weak."

Isn't this also "violence" in some sense?

【Can Justice Become Violence?】

People often say that justice is relative.

What is called "justice" under one ideology can also be "violence" under another ideology.

It is customary for countries at war to say to each other, "Justice is with us."

And, for the most part, each of us believes that to be true.

Yes, they must have their own "truth" and their own "justice".

In that case, each would argue that the other was wielding "violence."

But then "justice" becomes a name only.

What is it that makes "justice" "justice"?

【identity of justice】

By the way, what do you think humanity did to create a world without "violence"?

Human beings have created a system that observes the parties from the outside and seeks "fairness".

People often call it "law".

"Law" is a consensus in a closed world that includes parties, and converts "relative" to "absolute."

Have you ever seen this situation before?

Yes, it's similar to the previous "Decoherence" story.

Even if a ``quantum entanglement'' relationship occurs between quanta AB, decoherence does not occur by itself and remains in a coherent state. occurs, and the universe where the observer exists is determined to be one of the "superposition states".

To bring this back to the story of "justice"...

For example, when Mr. A and Mr. B argue with each other that ``justice belongs to me,'' they are in a superimposed state of a world in which Mr. A is justice and a world in which Mr. B is justice. justice is also true.

When a third party observes this from the outside (illuminates the law), the justice in the world of A, B, and the third party converges into one.

"Justice" means "correct reason".

If so, "justice" will ultimately have a direction consistent with the laws of nature.

In other words, natural law is the ultimate "justice".

Before the laws of nature, everything in the world, be it matter or energy, has no individuality other than a number that indicates its identity.

There is no special object, no special place.

Of course, there is no special country, no special people, no special people.

In that sense, it can be said that the world is equal.

It's a bit of a leap, but the roots of "human rights" should also be connected here.

If you feel some sort of contradiction in the sight of "the weak being unilaterally beaten by the strong", it is probably because it goes against the providence of nature.

Acts that go against the providence of nature are destined to be buried by the providence of nature.