Is it right for justice to protect the weak 10, is it right for justice to protect the weak

Tell me about my biography. May not necessarily match your worldview and values. Hope it helps.

When it comes to justice, I thought it was relative. In ethics, it usually refers to what people should do according to a certain moral standard, and also refers to a kind of moral evaluation, that is, justice. That's what the textbook says.

And it has also been said that justice represents the interests of the majority. From this point of view, in the real society, justice is in the hands of a group of people in the mainstream. Because the so-called justice needs to be recognized by the majority of people.

Therefore, it can be said that only what is recognized by the mainstream is what everyone calls justice.

The mainstream crowd is not strong, but it will certainly not be weak. They belong to the middle strata of society.

And the weak we are talking about probably belong to the group of people who have not received a fair distribution of social resources. For example, beggars on the side of the road, etc. They won't be the mainstream of society.

Therefore, in the eyes of the public, their right to speak is not so guaranteed. They cannot express their opinions in front of the public, or even participate in social discussions. So, I don't think justice necessarily protects the weak.

This is my personal opinion. Hope it inspires and helps!

Justice is merely synonymous with the interests of the majority.

When most people are weak, he can be used to condemn the strong, but he himself cannot protect anyone or anything.

Not necessarily, I personally think: justice protects good people!

Because "protection" is born for the "weak". In terms of word formation, they are correspondences.

So, that's a trick in itself. Not discussed.

Wrong. The weak are not necessarily right.

The law is used to maintain social stability.

The law is not to rob the rich and help the poor, the law does not eliminate evil, and it is impossible for every article of the law to conform to everyone's values.

The law protects the weak as well as the strong, the victim and the suspect. The law protects everyone with its own logic. Even if you break the law, you are still under the protection of the law, and you will be judged by the law that has long been written.

For the law, it is not important that there is right or wrong, it is important that everyone can have an estimate of their own behavior and then act according to the uniform rules. This is especially evident in the civil law, where many provisions are strictly open to the meaning that there is no right or wrong, that is, standards for the sake of standards.

Knowing this, it is easy to understand why law enforcement and judicial authorities like to give priority to mediation and reconciliation (especially in civil litigation and public order cases). The core of "learning about this Wang Fengqiao's simple experience" is to eliminate contradictions at the grassroots level, that is, to mediate more. As long as there is social harmony, punishment is not necessary.

For example, the Criminal Procedure Law's protection of criminal suspects and its restraint on the police are mainly based on the consideration of making up for the deficiencies in excess of the damage.

It means as follows:It sends a very important message that justice is not the preserve of the weak, but is shared by all. The meaning of this adage is that justice does not distinguish between strong and weak, and whether you are strong or weak, as long as you are on the side of justice, you can win.

In the real world, it is common to see the phenomenon of the strong bullying the weak, and this phenomenon is very common. However, if there is no justice for the weak, then the world becomes very unfair. Because in this world, everyone has their own rights and dignity, and they should be respected and protected.

Therefore, we must shoulder the responsibility of upholding justice, not only to fight for our own rights and dignity, but also to speak up for the rights and dignity of others.

At the same time, this adage also tells us that being weak does not mean being weak. As long as we have righteous faith and courage, we will be able to overcome all difficulties and challenges. Justice is the refuge of the weak and the restraint of the strong.

Therefore, we need to stand firm in our beliefs, stand up bravely, and fight for justice.

The justice of a good person is cowardly, but the justice of a strong person is dignified. There is truth in this sentence, but there are times when you ignore it, depending on what you think.

Of course, there is absolutely a correct side to this sentence, history is written by the victors, and the definition of justice is established and instilled by the strong. Just look at the United States. Is it just?

We don't think so? But its own people think that it can be just tight. Because it represents the interests of its own people.

But no matter what you think, whether you think it is righteous or not, it still uses its world's number one power to promote its own justice.

But in the same way, is its justice the justice of you and me? Some are, some don't. What is justice?

In fact, there may not be absolute justice in the first place. The so-called justice is only the standard line of the balance of interests. And how to divide this line into black and white up and down, and the position is in the **, it is originally a matter of opinion, and different interest groups express different views.

In determining the standard of justice, strength is absolutely indispensable. Power is the right to speak. Strength is also indispensable in the pursuit of justice that is in one's own interests. Strength is the auxiliary sign.

But, what is power? Is the power you have today the absolute power? Since power is based on quantity, it means that it must also or must be quantitatively measured in comparison.

There is much help for the righteous and little help for the unjust. Though you have power today, power beyond all the monoliths, to enforce what you consider to be justice. But what about tomorrow?

What about the day after tomorrow? When you do not agree with the power of your righteousness** to be superior to your power, your justice will be replaced by the justice of others.

Therefore, although power is justice and partial correctness, it is also meaningless to emphasize that power is "is" justice. For this power will not be constant forever, nor will justice be constant forever.

It's all about endless change. It's better for us to believe in Lao Tzu.