Hi Lee, I think this is a really important point to make, and I'm sure
would apply to other concepts which many of us would assume have a shared
meaning.  (Just think what happens when people decide to try to define what
is meant by 'love', how many different kinds of love there are, etc).

The meaning we give to a word such as 'justice' is not just a case of
determining prototype, which in itself creates challenges.  I would suggest
that the main difficulty lies in the fact that what any of us mean by
justice depends both on our ontological view of the world (our theory of
being), and the values that derive from that ontology.   So if we have a
Gaian ontology, where we believe that everything and everyone is
interconnected, and all things / living things / human beings (select
whichever accords with your ontological view) have equal value, then
justice will be about the action that needs to be taken to ensure that the
belief that you have about the nature of the world is put into practice.

However, if you have an objectivist, Newtonian mechanistic worldview, which
is complemented by a neoliberal ideology, which reflects the principle of
market forces, then you have a worldview that assumes - and indeed
encourages that - there will be winners and losers.  In that sense,
'justice' presumably is action that ensures that everyone has an equal
chance to become either a winner or a loser!

I realise I am giving rather stark examples to make a point, but the main
point is that - because there is no means of getting to the stage where we
all agree about answers to fundamental questions to do with the origins,
purpose etc of our lives - we have no shared 'model of reality' -  then
there is no way of agreeing what words such as justice mean, because
meanings of concepts such as these, and the worldviews of the people using
the concepts, are too intricately interrelated.

In the context in which I work, people will start by giving their own
understanding of justice / social justice (accepting that there is no
'objective' universal definition), and proceed to write / research from
that basis.  In this context, it is - as you suggest - useful to identify
what kind of justice you're talking about - e.g. restorative justice - but
again, even slightly tighter terms will still be subject to ontological /
values-based assumptions, which I suggest would still need explaining.

But it's an important conversation to have, because too many people feel
that a shared definition is possible, and usually assume that the
definition they hold is the one all others should have!

Best wishes

Joan



On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 at 13:06, Leland Beaumont <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Thanks for a great presentation.
>
>
>
> I want to better communicate an idea I struggled to express during the
> Monday night forum.
>
>
>
> The idea is that “we have no consistent prototype for the word ‘justice’”.
>
>
>
> How do we learn the meaning of words? In the example of the word “tree” we
> learn this that and the other are trees, and bushes, shrubs, flowers, grass
> and cell towers are not trees. From these specific examples our language
> brains construct a protype to link to the word (symbol) “tree”.
>
>
>
> Contrast this with learning the word “justice” How can we point to
> examples of justice? A few examples form the past few months include neck
> kneeling, commuting the sentences of Rodger Stone, and kidnapping
> demonstrators. A broader sample ranges from “an eye for an eye” to broad
> reparations. Theories of justice include retribution, restoration,
> remuneration, rehabilitation, and more. I contend the we don’t share any
> single concept that converges to the word “justice”. Equating justice with
> fairness is problematic because fairness itself is at least three concepts
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikiversity.org_wiki_Understanding-5FFairness&d=DwMFAg&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=O4f8TKrpHsvR2X0jU_l3N-S0WH1DcjFrC2kURd02sv8&s=aqCFcfC9iiOLvB_j0_gwgyz0RLcikm76V0bmlrot04k&e=>.
> We also need to ask “justice for whom”, “justice when” and “justice why”..
>
>
>
> While Waldemar described the difficulty learners (think young children)
> have in grasping abstract concepts, I contend that the lack of a broadly
> accepted prototype for various abstract words (such as “Justice”) is a
> large part of the problem. The word “Justice” is a composite of different
> concepts and these differing concepts need to be extracted separately and
> named separately to allow us to form a language prototype for each.
>
>
>
> One approach might be to differentiate diverse classes of actions that we
> now call “justice” and to take care to use that more specifically
> descriptive word in our communications. For example, we can take care to
> use terms such as “retributive justice” or “restorative justice”.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Lee Beaumont
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* tree of knowledge system discussion <
> [log in to unmask]> *On Behalf Of *Waldemar Schmidt
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 21, 2020 12:24 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: We Thrive TOK Meeting on Communication
>
>
>
> I have no objection.
>
> I enjoyed the opportunity to contribute.
>
>
>
> *Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD, MD*
> (Perseveret et Percipiunt)
> 503.631.8044
>
> *Strive not to be a success, but rather to be of value. (A Einstein)*
>
>
>
> On Jul 21, 2020, at 6:25 AM, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>   Thanks so much to Waldemar for his excellent presentation on
> Communication, Language, and Abstraction and the kind of thinking we need
> for the 21st Century. I will be posting the video of it tomorrow unless
> any of the participants object.
>
>
> Warm regards,
> Gregg
>
>
>
> *From:* tree of knowledge system discussion <
> [log in to unmask]> *On Behalf Of *Waldemar Schmidt
> *Sent:* Monday, July 20, 2020 7:01 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: We Thrive TOK Meeting on Communication
>
>
>
> Dear Friends:
>
>
>
> Thank you each and all for listening and participating.
>
> I have a couple of articles you might find interesting.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
> Waldemar
>
>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
>
>
> *Waldemar A Schmidt, PhD, MD*
> (Perseveret et Percipiunt)
> 503.631.8044
>
> *Strive not to be a success, but rather to be of value. (A Einstein)*
>
>
>
>
> On Jul 20, 2020, at 2:16 PM, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Folks,
>
>   We are meeting in 15 minutes to hear Waldemar walk us through his
> thoughts on communication. Here is the link:
>
> Join Zoom Meeting
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__us02web.zoom.us_j_88338698330-3Fpwd-3DYlluQzBCajFEUFZvYWphM0FITTI3dz09&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=98RpAkK1_-jXHTq2CyN1WBBrQnUM6zhIWJag0VvSHdw&s=TjDU9wCRJUn9sPP9THAn5ij9WwjciV_Zy35UsJcB18k&e= 
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__us02web.zoom.us_j_88338698330-3Fpwd-3DYlluQzBCajFEUFZvYWphM0FITTI3dz09&d=DwMFAg&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=Jsy9PSPCYTTXtNquWdYgDV5w6QQLlfCuqQQQCZSVb0A&s=txibAcxQ4DctJ3iGGbzk52YtVV_gXqN-lFvBIBhvE5k&e=>
>
>
> Meeting ID: 883 3869 8330
> Passcode: 801059
> One tap mobile
> +13126266799,,88338698330#,,,,,,0#,,801059# US (Chicago)
> +16465588656,,88338698330#,,,,,,0#,,801059# US (New York)
>
> Dial by your location
>         +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
>         +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
>         +1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown)
>         +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
>         +1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
>         +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
> Meeting ID: 883 3869 8330
> Passcode: 801059
> Find your local number: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__us02web.zoom.us_u_kdpUR81r2D&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=98RpAkK1_-jXHTq2CyN1WBBrQnUM6zhIWJag0VvSHdw&s=cv2tVgkVDpqVMnN0rfWM3tJ5O4UyeFFE60f13CkzBTM&e= 
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__us02web.zoom.us_u_kdpUR81r2D&d=DwMFAg&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=Jsy9PSPCYTTXtNquWdYgDV5w6QQLlfCuqQQQCZSVb0A&s=gyRR7mq57jo3udXehgOErTDwjsDqdl4-4_TUMmUmTIk&e=>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>
>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1