In this thread, I will all invite you to answer some questions. First, I believe that MBTI preferences influence one's definition and perception of injustice. Second, people should exhibit a preference for acting to rectify it in their environment, or accepting it as a part of life, though no one will uniquely show the behavior typical of a single attitude.
Proposed definition:
This definition stresses the importance of action, and hence, intentionality. It does not seem to include events that occur mostly without direct human action or lack of action. Social differences at birth, illness, natural catastrophes, accidents, individual differences in abilities, etc. are thus not considered as part of injustice in this definition.
Questions:
1. What is your type?
2. Do you agree with the M-W definition of injustice? Would you put in events not resulting from human action or lack of action? What else?
3. For each of the following examples, indicate if the outcome was fair or unfair and argue your stance:
3. For which stance do you exhibit a "preference" in your own life: Fight injustice and attempt to change your environment, or accept the reality of human affairs and go along with the state of things? Regardless of what you think people, groups, authorities should do, what do you actually do in your daily life? Why? Provide an argument as to why this stance is more viable to you than the other one. If your definition of justice is different than the one I proposed, explain your stance for both definitions.
a. 1. If you choose to fight injustice: Would you consider yourself a particularly "brave" person? Someone with guts to act? Do you think this could partly explain your behavior?
2. If you choose to accept reality: Would you consider yourself a particularly reasoned person? Someone realistic? Do you think this could partly explain your behavior?
b. I'm interested in your actual behavior. Any examples in your life showing how you reacted in certain situations illustrating the previous stance(s)?
4. (Optional) How would you have reacted in the examples I outlined?
5. (Bonus) Supposing you were a Jedi, would you side with the light or dark side of the force? Why?
Proposed definition:
Merriam Webster:
Injustice: Mean an act that inflicts undeserved hurt. Applies to any act that involves unfairness to another or violation of one's rights.
This definition stresses the importance of action, and hence, intentionality. It does not seem to include events that occur mostly without direct human action or lack of action. Social differences at birth, illness, natural catastrophes, accidents, individual differences in abilities, etc. are thus not considered as part of injustice in this definition.
Questions:
1. What is your type?
2. Do you agree with the M-W definition of injustice? Would you put in events not resulting from human action or lack of action? What else?
3. For each of the following examples, indicate if the outcome was fair or unfair and argue your stance:
Situation 1: Sebastian is a high scoring student that get 95% of answers correct on tests. He's quite cocky and likes to boast about his intelligence. He's always interrupting the teacher, Mr. Freeze. Mr. Freeze is fed up with his behavior, insolence and lack of respect for him. Although he realizes Sebastian is a smart kid, he thinks he has an attitude problem. On the final year exam, Sebastian gets 90% of answers correct, but Mr. Freeze decides to mark the student down to 45%. Mr. Freeze doesn't mean bad, but he thinks Sebastian needs to develop some humility. When Sebastian learns about his results, he is furious and curses the teacher, which other students find funny.
Situation 2: Amy has been working for 6 years in company A. Her performance is good. She has always been a helpful person and is well liked. One of her colleagues, Jodie, is a young hotshot and has been in the company since 6 months. Her performance is outstanding and she has achieved in 6 months what others have in 3 years. The manager, John, decides to promote Jodie. Amy is furious and feels betrayed, while Jodie revels in her achievement.
Situation 3: Peter started off as a construction worker in terrible working conditions. He had to work 14 hours a day with a low salary. 20 year later, social laws are stronger and workers are only supposed to do a maximum of 10hours a day. Peter is now manager of 20 construction workers, thanks to his dedication and hard work. Peter is stressed because he has to finish something for a client and is not sure he'll have the time. He decides to pressure the workers to work 2 extra "unofficial" hours and promises to give them "something" back one day. One worker, Alan, complains that they already do enough work and he's tired. Peter explains that *he* had to work 14 hours when he was young. Alan still refuses. Peter is furious at Alan's unwillingness to cooperate and rigidity. Peter cannot fire Alan without a reason. The next day, Peter uses an unrelated past mistake of Alan and fires him.
Situation 4: Patrick is a bit of a womanizer. He quickly gets infatuated with women. Patrick met Linda and they started dating. Linda has been unlucky in past relationships. After 1 month, patrick got infatuated with Linda, he told her he loved her and made all sorts of promises. Linda is so happy that Patrick loves her. She thinks this might be the right one! Unfortunately, Patrick realized 2 months later that he never really loved Linda, and that she isn't the woman he thought she was. Patrick decided to end the relationship, and did so by text message. Linda is heartbroken and finds all this particularly unfair. After all, he was making promises to her months before! The next day, Linda decides to wreck Patrick's car. Patrick has not got alot of money, and now he can't afford to buy a new one and has to take the bus everyday to go to work.
Situation 5: Richard, Toby, Nick and Charlotte have been in graduate school for 3 years now. They're preparing their engineering PhD. They've had a tough time getting their work published. In fact, only Toby has one article out. The others have none. Their advisor, Mr. Fire, says that PhD students graduate on average in 7 years. That's just the normal timeframe everybody has to go through in principle. Tom arrives in their department, working for another advisor, Mr. Johnson. Tom's not friendly. He only works. Tom works so efficiently and well that he manages to run 4x more experiments than the others in the lab in a year. He manages to get his work published systematically. 3 years later, he has accumulated 5 publications, leaving his colleagues in the dust. Everyone is frustrated by Tom. He's discouraging all the others because they cannot work at the same pace as him. They're all demotivated now. Tom is also cold and distant. Tom decides to present his PhD thesis earlier, considering his exceptional results. Academics accept, but when it comes to reading his work thesis, they say it's not good work and systematically ask him to rewrite entire sections for several months. They think he's progressed too fast and he can't just have it easy like that. He needs to sweat it like all the others.
3. For which stance do you exhibit a "preference" in your own life: Fight injustice and attempt to change your environment, or accept the reality of human affairs and go along with the state of things? Regardless of what you think people, groups, authorities should do, what do you actually do in your daily life? Why? Provide an argument as to why this stance is more viable to you than the other one. If your definition of justice is different than the one I proposed, explain your stance for both definitions.
a. 1. If you choose to fight injustice: Would you consider yourself a particularly "brave" person? Someone with guts to act? Do you think this could partly explain your behavior?
2. If you choose to accept reality: Would you consider yourself a particularly reasoned person? Someone realistic? Do you think this could partly explain your behavior?
b. I'm interested in your actual behavior. Any examples in your life showing how you reacted in certain situations illustrating the previous stance(s)?
4. (Optional) How would you have reacted in the examples I outlined?
5. (Bonus) Supposing you were a Jedi, would you side with the light or dark side of the force? Why?