LoJ:

This is quite an interesting analysis. I never thought of nor paid attention to that, as a former avid reader of socratic works and biblical writ.

I was told by an elder of the Lectorium that enlightenment is achieved by joining what he called spirituality of the heart and spirituality of reason. He told me that the spirituality of the heart is emotional in nature and include laughter passion and movement, while that of reason was austere, disciplined and methodic.

We never talked deeply about that, but maybe this goes in line with your observation.

Hi LoJ. How've you been?
The above wasn't really my observation. I listened to Joe Rogan Experience first thing this morning and it was a Cornel West interview. It struck me hard. Especially as I've often asked whether God has a sense of humour. Or whether he is a dry literalist like most of his followers.
I've heard before that the universe is a joke made by god. That would mean there is a punchline somewhere.

I think what the Lectorium elder may have been getting at is the mystical union of the Sun and the Moon. Aka uniting the roles of the priesthood with that of the Royalty to create a Royal Priesthood. Or then again the uniting of Upper and Lower Egypt.

Wow. How did I miss this thread?!

People often confuse Identity with Consciousness. This has led to much befuddled thinking on the subject matter of Consciousness.

Identity is a Psychological function whereby certain attributes and events are associated with a person or a thing.

One can be identified with a Name. One can be identified with a Tribe. One can be identified with Wealth. One can be identified with Intellect. Etc etc....

Consciousness on the other hand is a hard to define experience. Pure Consciousness is simply the awareness of Being. That Being itself being the Consciousness. It has no attributes but is itself by itself.

Free Will and Character


Free Will as the ability to determine your actions independent of all circumstances. When your choice is not the result of your situation, but something you totally arbitrarily Choose for yourself. The Crayfish that bends NOT because of it's condition but because it wants to bend.

Can anyone really be said to have FREE WILL or is not our choices determined by our condition/circumstance.


Character: Everything has a character. Cheese has it's character which is quite different from the character of Chalk. My character is quite different from your own. Everybody and everything has their own distinctive character.

Our behaviour (including the choices we make) are a result of our character. A fiery combative character is more likely to respond to a challenge by fighting, while on the other hand, a laid-back, peaceful character is more likely to respond to a challenge by backing down.

Is it possible to have Free Will if you have Character? (everything has Character).

Is it not more likely that every thing has innate tendencies which it is bound to adhere to? To be able to exercise an absolutely free will one would have to be utterly characterless, one would have to be Nothing effectively. (presuming Nothing is featureless)

These two things seem to be mutually exclusive. It's either you have Character or your have Free Will, you can't have both.


Does God/Creator/Diety have character? Does he/she/it act in strict accordance with his/her/its character or does he/she/it exercise Free Will?

God is Good, God is Love etc etc limits the Free Will and even the Omnipotence of said God.

Hello Pastor, are you getting busy these days or you are getting bored/tired of posting on nairaland? Please don't

Geist:
Hello Pastor, are you getting busy these days or you are getting bored/tired of posting on nairaland? Please don't

Seasons greetings Geist. Thanks for reaching out. I'll try to post some more stuff soon. Maybe later today sef...

True character: the best bonds

Since we have concluded that we as beings of character cannot therefore ever exercise Free Will, what should we strive for if not freedom?

I would say that we should strive for the best bonds. Everybody is bound by something, some of us would rather be bound by something else other than what currently binds us.

It seems obvious to me that the best thing to be bound by is one's own True character. That makes it of the highest importance that we should all individually come to knowledge of who we really are as individuals. Once we have that knowledge it becomes most important that we adhere to that character and act in strict accordance with it. There are many influences all around us that constantly tempt us about from following our True path. As Jesus says in the parable of the sower, once you've 'heard the logos' (come into knowledge of your True path) there will be many distractions and obstructions. For example the Satanic forces that work very hard to obfuscate this knowledge.

A common trick is to pretend to be on your side but in reality these Satans will never preach about the Logon Within from their pulpits or on their threads on NL or anywhere else. While they may not directly rebut or attempt to refute the teachings of the Parable of the Sower ( the key to the kingdom of Heaven) they will pile their listeners with so much other doctrinal nonsense that the message will get lost like the proverbial pin in the haystack. The only difference is that there is such a big haystack and no pin in it at all actually, because they do not even mention the Parable in the midst of all of their verbose obfuscations.

Satan =. Adversary, enemy, antagonist.

This can be anybody blocking progress.

Occasionally we hear of a specific Satan called ha-Satan (the Satan).

In Yoruba language we have a word that means exactly the same thing and when specified as a spiritual being it also has that name.

It is called Elenini.

You can use elenini for people who are a nuisance and block your progress but there is also a spiritual Elenini.

If we are to carry out the dangerous practice of translating words and ideas from one culture to another as we do from Hebrew bible to Yoruba language then surely the correct translation for Satan is NOT Esu, but rather Elenini.

If indeed we each have a unique character and each of the characters in the array of unique characters is distinctive then each life is best lived pursuing each their own unique objectives and motivations. Some people will pursue Athletic concerns, others will pursue intellectual concerns, others yet will pursue some other concern.

Yet we all grow up within Societies, and each society has it's own values that determines what it praises and what it scorns. Imagine a child born into a Society that extols athleticism and physical activities above all else. Imagine that this child is by Nature drawn to intellectual concerns, reading books and avoiding outdoor physical activities. This child will be derided all it's life while growing up. "Why can't you be like your peers, Look at Johnny he won gold medal in the 100m race, you couldn't even finish the race, useless boy".

Faced with this pressure the child might try to force himself to become more athletic and stop reading books. Or the child might be strong will and continue to pursue his own natural inclinations in spite of all the scorn that is poured on him in his society. Only the second option will bring him a True and deep inner contentment in his life. Following the second option he will experience what the Greeks call Eudaimonia, despite being a nobody in the Society in which he was raised.

PastorAIO:
True character: the best bonds

Since we have concluded that we as beings of character cannot therefore ever exercise Free Will, what should we strive for if not freedom?

I would say that we should strive for the best bonds. Everybody is bound by something, some of us would rather be bound by something else other than what currently binds us.

It seems obvious to me that the best thing to be bound by is one's own True character. That makes it of the highest importance that we should all individually come to knowledge of who we really are as individuals. Once we have that knowledge it becomes most important that we adhere to that character and act in strict accordance with it. There are many influences all around us that constantly tempt us about from following our True path. As Jesus says in the parable of the sower, once you've 'heard the logos' (come into knowledge of your True path) there will be many distractions and obstructions. For example the Satanic forces that work very hard to obfuscate this knowledge.

A common trick is to pretend to be on your side but in reality these Satans will never preach about the Logon Within from their pulpits or on their threads on NL or anywhere else. While they may not directly rebut or attempt to refute the teachings of the Parable of the Sower ( the key to the kingdom of Heaven) they will pile their listeners with so much other doctrinal nonsense that the message will get lost like the proverbial pin in the haystack. The only difference is that there is such a big haystack and no pin in it at all actually, because they do not even mention the Parable in the midst of all of their verbose obfuscations.

One does not even have to believe in a God or follow any particular religion in order to have a sense of Meaning and Order in Life. Just as, inversely, one may be very religious and yet suffer from depression and a sense of Meaninglessness.

In fact many Atheistic people/philosophers have noted and written about the Sense that there is an Order to person's life. Like a sense of fate or destiny that unfolds in the course of his life. Schopenhauer was one such writer. He wrote an essay titled Transscendente Spekulation über die anscheinende Absichtlichkeit im Schicksale des Einzelnen (1851).

I discovered this essay from a translation made into English by Joseph Campbell. Campbell comments on the essay as follows:

That’s right. schopenhauer, in his splendid essay called "on an apparent intention in the Fate of the Individual," points out that when you reach an advanced age and look back over your lifetime, it can seem to have had a consistent order and plan, as though composed by some novelist. Events that when they occurred had seemed accidental and of little moment turn out to have been indispensable factors in the composition of a consistent plot. So who composed that plot? schopenhauer suggests that just as your dreams are composed by an aspect of yourself of which your consciousness is unaware, so, too, your whole life is composed by the will within you. And just as people whom you will have met apparently by mere chance became leading agents in the structuring of your life, so, too, will you have served unknowingly as an agent, giving meaning to the lives of others, The whole thing gears together like one big symphony, with everything unconsciously structuring everything else. And schopenhauer concludes that it is as though our lives were the features of the one great dream of a single dreamer in which all the dream characters dream, too; so that everything links to everything else, moved by the one will to life which is the universal will in nature.

I discuss this here:
https://www.nairaland.com/776389/stay-hungry-stay-foolish#9292817

And here:
https://www.nairaland.com/146706/africa-needs-humanism-not-religious#2455926

If there is really such a Principle, a Will as Schopenhauer put it, a Logon as Jesus put it, A True Character that gives us our Nature and if we follow it we will achieve Eudaimonia then that begs the question, Why are there so many unhappy and discontented people in the world?

The Answer might be that they are unfulfilled because they have suppressed their True Nature. But then suggest that the Logos, Truth, is not Omnipotent but can be thwarted by the contrivances of the person. A person can spite himself and turn away from his True Character resulting in deeply seated Unhappiness. In doing so the person might actually be encouraged by his environment, his society, his friends and family. In the bid for Social acclaim he strives and contrives to act against his True Self.

I don't think that a person's Logon can be thwarted. It can be delayed by the obstinate contrivances of the person against himself, but ultimately the Logon/Will will be achieved by accident within the life time of the person or even after the person has died. For instance, if a man is gifted to the world to be the discoverer of the Cure for Cancer, yet this person does not pursue a career in medical research but rather goes into business because he sees that as a better opportunity to make money and to achieve social acclaim, what will happen is the person might through his life keep experiencing many unplanned accidental events that draw him towards getting involved with medical research. If he resists these accidental events (the calls of destiny) and persists in his business till his death ( and the business will kill him eventually) that Cure for Cancer will still be discovered as intended, by someone else after he is gone.

The True Will cannot be thwarted, it might be delayed by the recalcitrance of a person through whom the Will works. As such the Logos remains Omnipotent.

Our True path is what unfolds as we are busy pursuing another contrived path.

Imagine a man wanting to undertake a journey from town A to town B. On the way there is an accident which forces him to stop over at an inn in town C. While there he meets a woman with whom he falls in love and introduces invites him an event in town D where he discovers many things pleasing to his soul that he would never have discovered in town B. Things that made any desire to get to town B obsolete.

Already he has made quite a detour from the path he originally intended. A recalcitrant man full of contrivances would have resisted the distractions and detours and probably insisted on pressing on towards town B despite all the incidents that pulling him to stop over at town C.

When we are children we think as children and make childish plans. When we become adults we put away childish things. Similarly when we know little about our True Path we make all manner of plans, but in the course of pursuing those 'childish' aspirations little incidents and accidents occur that if we pay heed to will set us on a Truer path. The Call of destiny is all around, all the time. Behold, I stand at the door and knock.

PastorAIO:
People often confuse Identity with Consciousness. This has led to much befuddled thinking on the subject matter of Consciousness.

Identity is a Psychological function whereby certain attributes and events are associated with a person or a thing.

One can be identified with a Name. One can be identified with a Tribe. One can be identified with Wealth. One can be identified with Intellect. Etc etc....

Consciousness on the other hand is a hard to define experience. Pure Consciousness is simply the awareness of Being. That Being itself being the Consciousness. It has no attributes but is itself by itself.

I very much agree with this.

PastorAIO:
Free Will and Character


Free Will as the ability to determine your actions independent of all circumstances. When your choice is not the result of your situation, but something you totally arbitrarily Choose for yourself. The Crayfish that bends NOT because of it's condition but because it wants to bend.

Can anyone really be said to have FREE WILL or is not our choices determined by our condition/circumstance.


Character: Everything has a character. Cheese has it's character which is quite different from the character of Chalk. My character is quite different from your own. Everybody and everything has their own distinctive character.

Our behaviour (including the choices we make) are a result of our character. A fiery combative character is more likely to respond to a challenge by fighting, while on the other hand, a laid-back, peaceful character is more likely to respond to a challenge by backing down.

Is it possible to have Free Will if you have Character? (everything has Character).

Is it not more likely that every thing has innate tendencies which it is bound to adhere to? To be able to exercise an absolutely free will one would have to be utterly characterless, one would have to be Nothing effectively. (presuming Nothing is featureless)

These two things seem to be mutually exclusive. It's either you have Character or your have Free Will, you can't have both.


Does God/Creator/Diety have character? Does he/she/it act in strict accordance with his/her/its character or does he/she/it exercise Free Will?

God is Good, God is Love etc etc limits the Free Will and even the Omnipotence of said God.

As a wobbly compatibilist I can't help but ask could the case not be that there is a marriage between character and free will?

PastorAIO:
Satan =. Adversary, enemy, antagonist.

This can be anybody blocking progress.

Occasionally we hear of a specific Satan called ha-Satan (the Satan).

In Yoruba language we have a word that means exactly the same thing and when specified as a spiritual being it also has that name.

It is called Elenini.

You can use elenini for people who are a nuisance and block your progress but there is also a spiritual Elenini.

If we are to carry out the dangerous practice of translating words and ideas from one culture to another as we do from Hebrew bible to Yoruba language then surely the correct translation for Satan is NOT Esu, but rather Elenini.

So ha-Satan will the be Esu?

LordReed:


So ha-Satan will the be Esu?

Esu has absolutely nothing to do with ha-Satan. I'm suggesting that if you are to find a parallel in Yoruba cosmology then it would be Elenini.

LordReed:


As a wobbly compatibilist I can't help but ask could the case not be that there is a marriage between character and free will?

I supposed you are free to choose what to adhere to between your innate Character and environment influences. However any choice other than innate character will be painful and deprive you of Eudaimonia.

PastorAIO:


I supposed you are free to choose what to adhere to between your innate Character and environment influences. However any choice other than innate character will be painful and deprive you of Eudaimonia.

Great posts.

Please, how can one find one's true path in life?

gensteejay:

Great posts.

Please, how can one find one's true path in life?

You don't find it, It finds you. All you have to do is give in to it.

"Behold, I stand at the door and knock"

PastorAIO:


You don't find it, It finds you. All you have to do is give in to it.

"Behold, I stand at the door and knock"

Quite insightful. Thank you.

gensteejay:

Great posts.

Please, how can one find one's true path in life?

Given the current global geopolitics, with regards to our ancestors, elders and heroes, our true path has never been as clear.

I get it, everyone has a specific path, that is their real and true one.

And that understanding is carried into the thought process that says such path is to be visualised and materialised in an African context aswell as taking in mind the current geopolitics.

If one was to pose the same question in a thousand years from now, i'm certain the answer would be different.

Today, the answer i give is that our ways ought to be converging on the uplifting of the Africansic and giving our history its proper and rightful place in our world.

Our normal way of life, the continental way of life is our true and proper way forward.

Our normal way of life leads to virtuousness and all the benefits that comes with being virtuous, and may lead others to start another life after their present one.

Amujale:


Given the current global geopolitics, with regards to our ancestors, elders and heroes, our true path has never been as clear.

I get it, everyone has a specific path, that is their real and true one.

And that understanding is carried into the thought process that says such path is to be visualised and materialised in an African context aswell as taking in mind the current geopolitics.

If one was to pose the same question in a thousand years from now, i'm certain the answer would be different.

Today, the answer i give is that our ways ought to be converging on the uplifting of the Africansic and giving our history its proper and rightful place in our world.

Our normal way of life, the continental way of life is our true and proper way forward.

Our normal way of life leads to virtuousness and all the benefits that comes with being virtuous, and may lead others to start another life after their present one.

Thank you, bro.

In Plato's book, The Republic, Socrates delves into what it means to live Justly, i.e. Righteously.

He debates as to whether the Just man is a happy man, or whether unjust people can actually be happier.

The explore the issue of How to Live one's life by comparing by analogy a Human being to a City.

First though they have to determine what is meant by the word Justice.

some people argue that Justice is the Will of the Strong. Some argue that Justice is giving people what they deserve. 'Care is justly given to friends, and harm is justly given to enemies'... etc etc etc....

At the end of Book 1 he concludes that the Just are happier than the Unjust. The Just are happy to be themselves and to not exceed themselves in anything that they are doing. On the other hand the Unjust in their covetousness and stupidity are always seeking to be more than others and even more than themselves.

He argues that everything has a purpose in which it can be excellent or it can be short of excellence.

I will proceed by asking a question: Would you not say that a horse has some end?

I should.
And the end or use of a horse or of anything would be that which could not be accomplished, or not so well accomplished, by any other thing?

I do not understand, he said.
Let me explain: Can you see, except with the eye?
Certainly not.
Or hear, except with the ear?
No.
These then may be truly said to be the ends of these organs?
They may.
But you can cut off a vine-branch with a dagger or with a chisel, and in many other ways?

Of course.
And yet not so well as with a pruning-hook made for the purpose?
True.
May we not say that this is the end of a pruning-hook?
We may.
Then now I think you will have no difficulty in understanding my meaning when I asked the question whether the end of anything would be that which could not be accomplished, or not so well accomplished, by any other thing?

I understand your meaning, he said, and assent.
And that to which an end is appointed has also an excellence? Need I ask again whether the eye has an end?

It has.
And has not the eye an excellence?
Yes.
And the ear has an end and an excellence also?
True.
And the same is true of all other things; they have each of them an end and a special excellence?

That is so.
Well, and can the eyes fulfil their end if they are wanting in their own proper excellence and have a defect instead?

How can they, he said, if they are blind and cannot see?
You mean to say, if they have lost their proper excellence, which is sight; but I have not arrived at that point yet. I would rather ask the question more generally, and only enquire whether the things which fulfil their ends fulfil them by their own proper excellence, and fall of fulfilling them by their own defect?

Certainly, he replied.
I might say the same of the ears; when deprived of their own proper excellence they cannot fulfil their end?

True.
And the same observation will apply to all other things?
I agree.
Well; and has not the soul an end which nothing else can fulfil? for example, to superintend and command and deliberate and the like. Are not these functions proper to the soul, and can they rightly be assigned to any other?

To no other.
And is not life to be reckoned among the ends of the soul?
Assuredly, he said.
And has not the soul an excellence also?
Yes.
And can she or can she not fulfil her own ends when deprived of that excellence?

http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.2.i.html

He concludes that for the Human Soul, Justice is it's excellence.

And we have admitted that justice is the excellence of the soul, and injustice the defect of the soul?

That has been admitted.
Then the just soul and the just man will live well, and the unjust man will live ill?

That is what your argument proves.
And he who lives well is blessed and happy, and he who lives ill the reverse of happy?

Certainly.
Then the just is happy, and the unjust miserable?
So be it.
But happiness and not misery is profitable.
Of course.
Then, my blessed Thrasymachus, injustice can never be more profitable than justice.

PastorAIO:
In Plato's book, The Republic, Socrates delves into what it means to live Justly, i.e. Righteously.

He debates as to whether the Just man is a happy man, or whether unjust people can actually be happier.

The explore the issue of How to Live one's life by comparing by analogy a Human being to a City.

First though they have to determine what is meant by the word Justice.

some people argue that Justice is the Will of the Strong. Some argue that Justice is giving people what they deserve. 'Care is justly given to friends, and harm is justly given to enemies'... etc etc etc....

At the end of Book 1 he concludes that the Just are happier than the Unjust. The Just are happy to be themselves and to not exceed themselves in anything that they are doing. On the other hand the Unjust in their covetousness and stupidity are always seeking to be more than others and even more than themselves.

He argues that everything has a purpose in which it can be excellent or it can be short of excellence.


http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.2.i.html

He concludes that for the Human Soul, Justice is it's excellence.

What brilliance (even though I don't completely agree).

I reject the way some modern Eurocentric and Arabian fundamentalist writers and columnist make use of the term 'justice'.

And as OP points out, even the great olden days Eurocentric thinkers also made use of these same terms.

Apart from the judge and or magistrate, the only true and proper meaning of 'justice' is described in the terms of ones concern for just behaviour or treatment, peace, and genuine respect for people.

Justice doeant mean bullying people with physicality of sorts.

That has nothing to does with possessing a just behaviour.

Eurocentric and Arabian fundamentalist writers often would use the term 'justice' to refer to a 'just punishment' or a 'just reward' if the writer was into using sarcasm.

True justice may also be defined as the intention of doing no harm to the next guy.

Justice' has nothing to does with phisicality of sorts. Atleast it shouldnt be connected to conflict of any sorts, rather should be handled by common law and order policies.

Justice, as in, a just behaviour or treatment, always aiming to seek peace with one another, and genuine respect for others.

For me, that is whats meant by 'justice'.

What is the difference between Righteousness' and 'Virtuousness'?

It is ill-adviced for anyone to seek righteousness except for professional purpose. i.e military personnel, ambassadors e.t.c

Virtuousness is the quality that one ought seek and never 'righteousness'.

Virtuousness is everything that is falsely given to those that are called 'righteous' people.

Anyone that history pronounces as being 'righteous' is either a faker or simply a fictional character.

Very excellent @pastoraio. Please bring it on.

Humans have an evaluating mind. We impute values to the things we experience. Some things are valued lowly, other things are valued highly. And at the top of the value ladder we have the Ideals. Ideals are the highest values we can have.


There are 3 types of Values, but I want to discuss 2 of them.

These are: Utility Value, and Aesthetic Value.

We use our Utility evaluations when we have an objective that we are trying to achieve. We judge everything at hand by what use it has in achieving the objective. A man who want to travel to Ibadan from Lagos will place a high Utility Value on his Car. A lower Utility Value on his bicycle.

Aesthetic values are found in things that make us feel good. Listening to music can be highly valued because it makes us feel good, but it might be seen to have little Utility value. It is valued for itself and it's reward is immediate.

Imagine a subject, a fellow, who is reclined on his favourite luxurious sofa. The window is slightly ajar and a soft breeze flows through it and caresses his reclining body. Life is just perfect.... almost. One more thing. He plays his favourite music from his stereo, Oriental Brothers, Ebele Onye Uwa. Before long he can no longer rest reclined and begins to tap his feet, and then the sweetness of it all thrusts him up onto his feet. He starts to sway and groove, 'dang! what a sweetness!!'

Then he has an inspiration. He would like to extend the back of his house so he could accommodate more guests. The Inspiration will not leave him alone, it becomes a nagging thought in his head and it will not allow him to enjoy his repose anymore. In order to achieve this inspiration he would have to work some extra shifts at his job, Maybe getting some overtime in. Straightaway he calls to put himself down for the extra shifts. That would mean getting up earlier and getting back later from work. Already his mind has shifted away from trying to maximise the value of his Aesthetic experience and he is now thinking about how to achieve this vision of extending the back of his house. His mind turns to people he hadn't thought about in a long while. His friend Anthony who is a builder. 'Anthony would come in handy for this project, I should give him a call'. Suddenly he starts to appraise everything according to whether or not it will help to achieve this vision of extending the house.

While pursuing this objective he wilfully compromises all his Aesthetic Values. He puts himself through long hours of his gruelling work, hardly takes any time to listen to his favourite music or chill out and enjoy an evening breeze. A few weeks later he has amassed enough money and gotten Anthony to do the job and it is a splendid job. He feels a wonderful feeling of Gratification for achieving his vision. However he also feels extremely fatigued. Not just physically but in his entire soul he feels exhausted.

He finds himself pursuing Aesthetic ideals again and as he basks in Aesthetic experiences again he finds it has a restorative effect on his soul. He once again feels alive and rejuvenated.


Obviously with these 2 different Value systems as part of his being it is often the case that pursuing one leaves the other in detriment and vice versa.

Ideally a course of Life that finds an harmonious blend between the two value systems would be the way to go.

Hi, I believe that anyone can use words in any way that one pleases as long as the word is clearly defined so that the people one is speaking to knows what exactly one means by the use of the word in question.

I think that the way Socrates uses the word Justice is to say 'The Right way'. what is Right is Just and what is Just is Right. I don't think he is saying that Justice has to be violent. Unless it is right for someone to be violent then Violence is not Just.

Amujale:
I reject the way some modern Eurocentric and Arabian fundamentalist writers and columnist make use of the term 'justice'.

And as OP points out, even the great olden days Eurocentric thinkers also made use of these same terms.

Apart from the judge and or magistrate, the only true and proper meaning of 'justice' is described in the terms of ones concern for just behaviour or treatment, peace, and genuine respect for people.

Justice doeant mean bullying people with physicality of sorts.

That has nothing to does with possessing a just behaviour.

Eurocentric and Arabian fundamentalist writers often would use the term 'justice' to refer to a 'just punishment' or a 'just reward' if the writer was into using sarcasm.

True justice may also be defined as the intention of doing no harm to the next guy.

Justice' has nothing to does with phisicality of sorts. Atleast it shouldnt be connected to conflict of any sorts, rather should be handled by common law and order policies.

Justice, as in, a just behaviour or treatment, always aiming to seek peace with one another, and genuine respect for others.

For me, that is whats meant by 'justice'.

PastorAIO:

I think that the way Socrates uses the word Justice is to say 'The Right way'. what is Right is Just and what is Just is Right. I don't think he is saying that Justice has to be violent. Unless it is right for someone to be violent then Violence is not Just.

I get your point here.

I am a huge fan of Socrates and appreciate socratic values.

However the point is that modern Eurocentric and Arabian fundamentalist writers have turn the term Justice to mean a violent way of justifying an action and or a justification for violence.


Justice is never any of those things above

Justice is meant to be an intention that has little or no kind of violence, depending on the given scenario.

Nowadays, Justice is attached to bullying, conflict and blatant injustices.

There is a most exquisite bliss in Urgency before the experience of gratification. This bliss exceeds the gratification.