TEACHER : "Use defeat, defense and detail in a sentence".
LITTLE BILLY: "When de Wabbit jump over defense, defeat goes over defense before detail."
Fendo, fendere - Latin verb: to push from
De fend-push out from (a fixed point)
Of fend- push away from
Fence- Boundary, Border, maker of good neighbors
What is "Justice"?
It happens that the County Courthouse in Marion Ohio was built with a statue of "The Lady Justice" surmounting the top of it's tower. It also happened that sometime in the 1950's or 60's that statue disappeared from the top of the tower dome and was seen no more. (A typical High School Seniors prank -seniors were a little more ambitious in those days)
Some time in the '90s, the statue of Lady Justice mysteriously turned up in a local farmer's barn. He naturally did not know how it had come to be there, but Marion County was glad to have it back and didn't pursue the matter. ( how do you "prosecute" someone for doing something that is clearly impossible? i.e., stealing a half ton statue from the top of a courthouse?) ( justice is in the eye of the beholder)
The Statue was exhibited in the rotunda of the courthouse while arrangements were made to restore it to its perch atop the courthouse.
It happened that I have a friend who practices law in Marion, and he had a daughter of about 8 at that time, and she saw and was impressed with "The Lady Justice" and would stand and admire the statue when she visited the courthouse with her father.
Came the time when "Lady Justice" was returned to her place atop the courthouse. My friend's daughter missed her and asked where she was? My friend pointed her out atop the courthouse.
His daughter asked, "What's she doing up there?"
He replied, "She's hiding from the Lawyers"
It's only 95% of the Lawyers who give the others a bad name. My friend is (usually) part of the other 5% (he also has a pretty keen wit)
Justification: Latin: Ius Facio : To make or fix "Right" (Harmony/Balance)
Associated with Libra-(Free) The Scales
What does "justification" mean?
"Justification" is the literal "making" or "fixing" of "Right" (Ius ,Iuris)-harmony, balance "righteous in the eyes of God, upright and impartial," O.Latin ious, lit. "sacred formula," -a "Right" is a "mandate by Nature to a behavior, state of being, or course of action" cf. Justice, Jury ."Harmony and balance" in society are achieved by noting and respecting "Rights"
It is "Right", not in the sense of "Correct" according to and in agreement with law or rules, but rather "Right" as in Harmonious, Fair, and Balanced as perceived by the emotions and intuition. It is in the same sense that one "Justifies type", making an harmonious and balanced composition. It is not of "Reason", but of emotion and intuition.
This gives rise to the paradox of "Legal" vs "Just"
Declaim, scream, yell, ignore as you will, in the end you cannot deny that the perception of "Justice" is not of "Reason"(Legalities) but of Intuition"(Experience/Perception)
The Asymptotic approach of "Law" to "Justice"
There was a missionary who became the village idiot of a tribe in Africa. He accomplished this by bringing forth a Photograph of his Wife, and,
said, "This is my Wife"
Ever after he was laughed at as "The Man who believes he is married to a piece of paper"
Laws are the "Blueprint/plans" for a society- (Just or not)
Our society is meant to be "Just" so our Laws are meant to be the "blue print" of a "Just" society
Some things you believe not because they are "True", but because they are "Right"
This is why "Law" may be "close" to "Justice" but never achieves it. Law approaches "Justice asymptotically, as a limit.
"Law " is never "Justice" in the same sense that knowledge is not wisdom.
What is the difference between the Wisdom of Solomon
and the "knowledgeable" decision of the village elder (Lawyer) opining "Cut the Baby in Half!"?
( which means in practice that the baby must be divided into two parcels of 35% to the claimants and two parcels of 15% for the Lawyers)
Which is forever after codified by legislation (Did I mention that it's usually the village elder who sets himself up to legislate?) stating that in the case of 2 claimants for a baby, that baby shall be divided as 35% to each claimant and 15% to each Lawyer. So let it be written, so let it be done.
(Do you begin to see how our "legislation" is currently made by our “senators” (Senex-old, senior,senile)
Don't set out to sea on the blueprints for your boat.
As an illustrative aside
I have by times and in fits and starts worked as a sculptor in clay, fiberglass, steel, and junk.
I have conceived in my mind a statue dedicated to " The Spirit of Mankind"
I've meant to build it for 40 years.
My definition of "Mankind' is: A Wind-driven device for pissing at the Wind
I have sketched blueprints for such a device to be set up as a garden fountain, along the lines of garden Gnomes, Flamingos, and Glass Balls.
These blueprints detail a basic windmill and vane which both drives a pump to propel a stream of water and orients the blissfully self cooling manikin so that he sprays his bravado at the proper assaulting air current. The mechanism is really rather trivial and the play on Characterization is limitless ( Obama? Bush? Use your imagination) My desire was for a heroic bearded and Herculean figure, laughing - about 30 feet high and situated somewhere near Times Square. (Note- need to assess wind currents )
("Womankind" is the companion piece, a statue of a hard pressed primal mother, nursing a child, cooking spitted meat over a fire, and looking at "Mankind" while rolling her eyes)
I do not here abandon my claim to have originated the concept of such a characterization or device, But I place it before the public as a concept. I invite artists or entrepreneurs to embody it, because, though I see where the novelty might make me a wealthy vendor of garden paraphernalia or an acclaimed artist, I have realized that I haven't the wherewithal to embody it. And if someone else will create and bring it forth into reality, I might be able to spend my declining years in my garden, listening to the wind and "mankind's" reply. I cannot sit and experience a blueprint, or a concept. It is real to the Mind, but it is not Reality.
So "The Law" is to "Justice"
Do not , ever, mistake or substitute the concept, the design, the plans, the blueprints, for the actual reality and/or experience of the thing conceived.
When the blueprint says it's "Right" and the ship capsizes on being launched, it isn't the sunken ship that is "Wrong"
So when I set out to "Justify" DeFence of "SELF", I will not consult any laws of man or logic, but will seek to show when and why DeFence of " SELF" is harmonious, balanced and "Just".
How does one "Justify"
DeFence of Self?
The first requirement of a harmonious appraisal of ones "Right"(natural inclination) to defense of Self is the Definition (Finis-End /Limit) and DeTermination ( Terminus-end) of De Fence that DeLineates one's "SELF"
What CAN you include within De Fence of your SELF?
What is it permitted for you to include?
What is it forbidden for you to include?
Who has the Authority to decide?
To Whom do You allow the authority?
What Do YOU include as SELF within TheFence?
Good Fences make good neighbors.
They also make good "SELF"s
Know Thy Limits.
Know the boundaries that mark the "fence" of your "SELF"
The first "given" is that YOU define the fence of your SELF
This does not mean that you can or may then therefore and of right control all that you define as "SELF"
Harmony demands that you include only that which you CAN control, or that which you are content to accept as beyond your individual ability to control
There are also ethical considerations about the will of others to define themselves in areas that overlap your SELF
I like the term "To Own" as a way of describing an experience or a belief as a part of what is included within the fence of the SELF.
Robin had a recent post where she "Owned" having "stripped " at the age of 10 for an audience of sailors.
She was challenged for this by ….who felt that such "Exploitation" was shameful and must be presented as a shameful episode, if at all. Robin refused to do this, and said she "OWNED" this as an experience in her life. I side with Robin, without at all meaning to offend or disparage ....,.
One feels as one feels.
“Make it didn't happen” doesn't work, I felt as I felt;
I feel as I feel
I OWN it.
It is within De Fence of my SELF
The second "given" is that OTHER (not SELF) will attempt to force ITs definition of your SELF upon you.
Other can and will attempt to define/delimit your SELF, both as a means to control your SELF( thereby enlarging its SELF) and a means to defend its SELFs from your SELF
Other can not, but will try to, tell you that you may not OWN that as self, because it is dangerous
Other can not, but will try to, tell you that you may not OWN that as self, because it has no value
Other can not, but will try to, tell you that you may not OWN that as self, because it encourages OTHER's dependent selves to view the dangerous as not dangerous
Other can not, but will try to, tell you that you may not OWN that as self, because it encourages the predators to think they are "Normal" and have a "RIGHT" to do as we forbid them
My wife worked in Children's Services in a county where incest was a way of life.
It was usually not hard to sort out the EVIL of such exploitation.
Burt She still wonders about the "Good" done for some children, who were adamant that daddy loved them and Sex was just one of the ways daddy showed he loved them. At what point does "Public Approval" conquer "Free Will?" Read "If all Men were brothers would you let one marry your sister?" Also, many of the Robert Heinlein stories. Incest? I find it repugnant. May I forbid it to you? I plead "None of my Business" ( child rape is something else- that is my business)
Polygamy? That actually is a little bit attractive to me. ( Don't tell my wife) May I forbid it to You? I plead "None of my Business"
Homosexuality? God, I am so not interested. (I plead 5 disgusting brothers and 18 years of wrestler locker rooms) None of my business.
What is the "Justification"/balance you strike between "SELF" and "OTHER"?
Who/what is "Other"? Other individual personalities are relatively negligible in their attempts to force your definition of DeFence of your SELF
"OTHER" in its most aggressive form is "The State", or "Government",or any body or corporation which attempts to coerce your perception and definition of SELF and behavior.
What is the "Justification"/balance you strike between "SELF" and "OTHER"?
There is the problem of "Legal" or “Logical” limits to SELF vs SELF defined limit.
This is not to deny Thee existence of the an “objective” REALTY shared with what I am at least provisionally willing to block off as other “Selfs”( because they claim some form of “self”hood)
Thou “s, as it were
To aid the comprehension of this, I have for about 40 years divided the Universe into
“Real I ty” and “Realty”
“Realty” is the universe of properties and values and the trade and imposition of them among Selfs
“Real I ty”, is my ( and by extension YOUR- though by definition, not the same) universe of perception
These are roughly “objective” vs “subjective”, “Symbolic” vs “Experiential”,
Logical vs Intuitve
Note that “Realty” is Reality without the “I”
Reality always comes from/with an “I” (SELF)
“Objectivity” purports to be “Self” less
It is the viewpoint of “Realty”
All, every experience, every thought, every work of art or science
Is to be weighed and converted to “Properties” which may be traded
Logic ( Literally from logos: symbol manipulation.) and symbols are “Self” less
Property is “Self”less
“Objectivity” is “Self”less
“Objectivity” is “Death” ,fixed, unmutable
To be “objective is to be “dead”
Next time someone claims “Objectivity” check his pulse
Subjectivity is self will, self definition, no rules, no society.
Subjectivity is each to his own perceptions, defending his fence.
“Real I ty” is our true subjective world of existence, each and everyone swallowed whole and reveling in his singular and unique universe of perception. And ultimately loneliness
Communion, community (co munio- to strengthen together) is the sharing of our individual realities by means of changing the value, the individual “Coinage” of our experiences and intuition, Real I ty, for the more common and more base, but more negotiable coinage of Realty- symbols and the manipulation of symbols- Logic.
The “moneychangers” Christ drove from the temple are not the ones who trade in mere negotiable gold or jewels, they are the ones who steal from individual faith and Real I ty, by giving false symbols for real and valuable experience. ( Ah, you didn’t see nuthin, it’s swamp gas)
Beware how very easily they value The “Priceless” as “Worthless”
(Can’t set a value on your cat’s life? Ok it’s worthless)
I believe we too often misuse the term “Reason” in these days/our culture
Too often, it is used to imply only “an ability to do logic”, and intuition is dismissed as “magic”
Reason, to me, implies the use of both of mankind’s judgment making facilities.
A true SELF recognizes the power and validity of BOTH Symbol manipulation (Logic)
And Experiential learning (Intuition) ( One of these days I’ll explain to you how “Magic” works)
My “SELF” is both. My Being is, however, subjective. My Reality knows no “other”.
Personally, I think of my SELF as a Fwee Wange Wabbit.
I jump over de fence without defeat and thereby hangs detale
The best defence is no’fence.
All of my Real I ty , (Subjectivity-the space I live in) exists solely as my perceptions, and
no 'fence meant, but I "OWN" it ALL! - These are ALLmy perceptions, these are All my experiences. NoThing exists that is not part of my "SELF"
Like Monstro, I swallow it all .
I may adjust the attitude of anyone who offends me
I am very hard to offend
So long as I do not harm, I do not become a “Bad Person”
The best and most “justified” Self Defense is the art of “Attitude Adjustment”
And that’s the Art of de Fence of Self
I justify my self defence by being de fence less.
Hare Jitsu, the Marital Art of being de Fence less
As taught by Sensei Bugsu Bunyo
An example of Hare Jitsu (Har-ee Jeet-sue-: Literally : “mad as march hare”)
I lived for a time in Westerville, Ohio- a somewhat upscale/middleclass suburb of Columbus.I had a house with a drive that went beside it to an open parking area at the back of my house. Along the side of the drive opposite the house was a tall fence
This created a space behind the house which was not readily visible from the street, and in that space was parked a “vintage” ( ok, very used) Volvo
One summer night about midnight, I got up from the couch where I had been reading, to go to bed. My wife was off visiting her sister, so I had spent the evening in a darkened house with the windows open, and the air conditioning off.
As I was closing one of the side windows, I heard voices, and on looking back toward the Volvo, I saw the glow of cigarettes in the dark. There were three late teen, early twenties, kids- boys, sitting on my car smoking and quietly talking.
I didn’t really think they were doing anything in particular, except hanging out in a dark place where patrolling police wouldn’t see them. And they weren’t really hurting anything .But, I’d seen cigarette butts back there before and I didn’t really want my backyard to become a hangout.
So what to do. A good citizen would probably have just called the cops, but I really wasn’t in the mood to deal with cops, and I didn’t want the kids either being hassled by cops for really not doing much of anything , or harboring a grudge against me for turning them in.
I also wasn’t too certain how they would take it if I went out to talk to them. Most kids in Westerville were no more than average surly, but there had been incidents of fights and kids carrying weapons. I could have walked out there with a pistol, but that would have just irritated them. I don’t really know how much damage I could have done to them in a “free-for-all”, but I know how much damage they’d probably do to me. With three of them and no option but to shoot them if things turned violent, I didn’t want to set up that situation.
Chances were that if I went out and just asked them politely to leave, they would. But the chance was real that I might provoke some kind of confrontation. And they were being “Mostly Harmless” but I really wanted them to quit using my yard as a gathering place. And I didn’t want them coming back later “disgruntled’ and trashing my house or car.
So what the heck. I was wearing South Park shorts, an OSU buckeye T-shirt and flip flops. I added to that a German WWII “Coal Scuttle” helmet and an 8mm Mauser rifle, which is about 5’1/2 feet long including a 12 inch Bayonet.
I stepped out the side door, put the rifle to port arms, and “goose-stepped” up to them.
I said, in my best Artie Johnson, accent, “Vat are you boys doink?”
After a stunned silence, one answered “Nothing!”
I said,” I vould really appreciate it greatly if you vould do it somevere else”
They went away.
I never saw them again.
Fwee Wange Wabbit vs Roger's Rabbit (Michael Moore)(Who fwamed woger wabbit vs "Meet the Meat" douglas adams
Pacifism vs Passivism
Community: On being First Person Plural. Active Voice
Just keep turning left, you'll get there eventuallyTwo wrongs don't make a Right but three Lefts do