Press "Enter" to skip to content

A thought inspired by Monday’s Daf (page) in the Talmud, Gittin 55

A thought inspired by Monday’s Daf (page) in the Talmud, Gittin 55

Realistic Justice.

This post presents a philosophical idea inspired by the text of today’s Daf. The Daf is one page in the Talmud that tens of thousands of people study each day. I explain the connection to the text in a comment below. My purpose is to show that there are underlying philosophical assumptions in the Talmud that can have great significance for anybody today trying to understand our complex reality.

Imagine if we had a technological solution or a change in social policy that could bring greater fairness and justice to the world or alleviate suffering on a global scale.

However, we would face opposition from powerful forces. These may include entities that have amassed wealth at the expense of others, or individuals who wield significant power or violence for their own agendas or self-interest. Why would they willingly give up their advantage?

How should we proceed in such a situation? Should we move slowly and allow damage to accumulate, or prolong the suffering? Should we attempt to persuade the powerful by offering them incentives or bribes to reduce their resistance to change?

There is something deeply troubling about rewarding those who have caused harm. Not only have they benefited from their selfish or misguided policies, but now we propose to continue rewarding them in the future. Furthermore, a slow approach to change will only prolong the suffering caused by their injustices.

On the other hand, perhaps pure justice is not the only value we must consider. Maybe our policies should incorporate realistic goals. It is possible that allowing those who have behaved badly to keep their ill-gotten gains will create a better future for the rest of us. It is also conceivable that advocating for a perfectly just solution may result in further suffering and harm.

In some cases, those responsible for the damage may actually prefer to halt the harm, but they fear the consequences for themselves. Fair or not, the best course of action might be to develop a policy that enables them to do the right thing.

While compromise may not always be the best approach, we must remember that all values must coexist. Tempering justice may lead to a better future.

submitted by /u/eliyah23rd
[link] [comments]

Source: Reditt

%d bloggers like this: