Page - 135 - in Reflective Cosmopolitanism - Educating towards inclusive communities through Philosophical Enquiry

IN AND OUT THE PARk (MANUAL) 135 Exercise: Authority/Authoritative Decide if each person mentioned in the discussion plan is an authoritarian or authori- tative person and give reasons. Now try to explain the difference between authoritar- ian and authoritative. Exercise: What would happen if authority didn’t exist? Write a short essay imagining a country where no form of authority exists. What would happen in this country? How would the inhabitants live? How would the society be structured? Episode 2: The raid Leading Idea 1: Instrumental justice While it is very difficult to give a single definition of justice; maybe it is easier to define what is just or unjust within a system of shared norms. In the history of Western thinking, the sophists broke the tight relationship that existed in ancient Greece between the laws of nature (physis) and the laws of politics (nomos), the latter of which was considered only in a positive way. For this reason, we often refer to the term ‘justice’ as referring to a col- lection of positive rules that regulate human behaviors and help to discern between them. Nevertheless, there are different types and systems of norms. In some cases, the norms regulate behaviors that allow for certain goals and community needs to be satisfied. Every community corresponds to a different system of norms, so what is legitimate in one normative system may not be legitimate in another. For example, let’s consider an association of citizens, seamen, or criminals. In all these communities, it is opportune that the behaviors adapt to those norms that allow the community to maintain the same association and reach its goals, and in this system of norms these behaviors are considered “right.” However, the nature and goals of the varying communities are different. In a system of norms that regulates a com- munity of criminals, some behaviors that operate in this system may be considered “right.” However, in the system of norms that regulate civil society, they might not be considered so. Therefore, we can ask: “Are there behaviors that are universally right, or is there a plu- rality of normative systems that allow people to distinguish on a case-by-case basis what is right and what is not?” If justice is seen as a principle that allows us to judge and orient our human behaviors, is it normative or instrumental? And if justice is instrumental, is what is right for one group also right for another? Is it possible to orchestrate the relationships between the varying “instrumental justices” of different groups? Would this orchestration be based on a kind of instrumental justice or should it appeal to a higher ideal? Could this higher ideal, if it exists, not only orchestrate the relationships between the different “instru- mental justices,” but also limit the demands of the latter? Should it do that? These ques- tions are very important in a context where the encounter between different cultures could imply different interpretations of what can be defined as right and instrumentally right. You can find further information about the concept of “Justice” in the manual to Tina and Amir, episode 4, Hanadi, episode 2 and Christian, episode 5.