The process of forming a Judgement

MaIvado: “A judgment is an opinion that you have or express after thinking carefully about something” - collinsdictionary.com

Scenario:

Individual A kills individual B.

Pause here. Note your judgement: Any pity of B? Should A face any penalties [and if so what types], etc?

Start again, adding character information:

Individual A [orphaned by WW2, saw first hand the graphic death of his family. His baby sister killed & eaten by a gang of men], kills Individual B [a war criminal who was part of said gang. Current crimes included murder, human trafficking of women and children and corruption as a law officer.]

Pause there. Any change of judgement?

Start again, now adding in a detail:

Individual A kills Individual B by tying him to a tree stomp with a noose around his neck. The other end tied to a horse. Slowly walking the horse in the opposite direction until Individual B is decapitated.

This scenario is taken from Thomas Harris’ Hannibal Rising. Talented writer.

___________________

It’s useful to review how our individual judgements might shift/ change depending on character, motive, circumstances, method, biases. Happens all the time.

Questions: Did you have any changes in judgement or was there as a plateauing? Should judgement be strictly made based on action or should it encompass other things (eg motives, circumstances, character)? Are you aware of what moulds your judgements? Your thoughts.

PaleBurnedAcid: To me the only crime that can never be justified is rape. There are some cases where theft is perfectly justifiable. Murder is often justifiable. One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter. For me the motive and circumstances are part of how I judge. If I've learned one thing in life it's that it's rarely ever black or white.

MaIvado:
True. I take that position also.

I’ve seen so many times the same actions viewed differently.. beginning to contemplate if to adjust to strictly black/white to avoid the natural bias that’ll affect my judgement.

Greyfeather: greyfeather

Greyfeather: Some take revenge by their hands but the law forbids this because it takes revenge legally by considering Justice rather than partial individual judgment

MaIvado:
I’ll read your blog.

I think the legal process can have a slight partiality of the judge/jurors. For the same reasons highlighted as grey areas. That’s why they say that the selection of the right jury can make or break the case. That voir dire moment is key to detecting the individual partiality which will suit one side over the other.

We can’t be free of partiality, but do you think we should have a judicial system that will be free of it? Or that partiality is useful in the process?

Greyfeather: The judicial system always needs a movement of interpretation, and that movement means always examination instead of the inevitability of laws that are often defective if they continue as they are without understanding the changes in human conditions, taking into account some things that balance the interest of the individual and the group, justice or injustice follow the method of the state, some rules give extra powers to the individual due to not deterrent law that will make it easier for the individual to make crimes ,so the stronger will control the weaker, and the weaker can become stronger and again will control the weekest and so the rule will be for the stronger , like some rish people their money will justify their Crimes by relationship with the state, it seems that we need to balance the relationship of the individual with the group and put laws that deter crimes for the rulers and the public, and make better state by understanding and continuous research, sometimes the state is criminal against its members so such a state will provide enmity inside the individuals against each other or others outside their state due to the defect of educational system.