"You assume that one is harming the guilty in pursuing his penance"
No. I have no assumptions to make about it. I was questioning your statement that it restores a moral balance to the universe. I find such an idea rather far-reaching.
What we do know is that different societies have different ideas about "justice"; but in the main, "justice" serves the purpose, either of individual revenge, or of transmuting that revenge to a more objectively administered retribution. The purpose is to promote safety and conformity. In primitive cultures this is primary.
In more "civilized" cultures, ideas of "fairness" attach to more subtle infractions than outright initiated force. In western culture rights and freedoms have been elucidated to such a degree that "fairness" is a dynamic concept which is often in flux, and subject to the prejudices of law...and often about as meaningful as a coin toss.
"I would say that the penance is purgative, somewhat like giving an emetic or excising a tumor. In context, it is not primarily harmful"
Is electrocution like an emetic, then? Or are you simply referring to appearing before a priest when you say "penance"?
"Nor are we responsible for the overall moral quality of the universe, just that little part that falls under our jurisdiction."
Even if one permits you such an assumption, what is your point then in referring to the moral balance of the universe, rather than simply addressing the moral relations of humankind? The former misleads people by seeming to pretend that the universe has some moral quality independent of human relations, and that things (for instance) such as floods may be given a moral rating for the manner or degree to which they unbalance or balance the moral fiber of the universe.
"Restoring the moral balance of the universe, at a minimum, means showing respect for the principles that order our lives, deploring an egregious violation of them, and taking affirmative steps to not let someone shirk responsibility for his actions......."
All these things vary by culture and by group. Certainly, the biological similarities of humans often encourage similar principles of social behaviour. But people are not trying to restore the balance of the universe. They are merely trying to get along. They wish to survive, and therefore they need to be safe. They wish to be happy, and therefore they need to have social harmony.
"Restoring the balance of the universe" seems to be rather grandiose in conception. The practical consequences of a society attaching its wagon to the dogmas of visionaries, is that what is just and right, needs to be settled with tanks and cannon. Those who think in terms of restoring the "moral balance of the universe" often promote a supernatural belief system peculiar to their race or culture, and this (as we see on a daily basis) is not only self serving, but a justification for war and interference.
Behaviour is severely restricted when it relates to general principles of basic rights and freedoms. However, much may be justified by those attempting to restore the "moral balance of the universe". Such ambitious dreams lead to such ideologies as communism and fascism. They lead to religious fanatics intent on death and destruction to non believers, as they each follow their principles, and try not to not let people shirk responsibility for their actions. Try not going to mosque in some countries. Watch how quickly they restore the "moral balance"... |
