Justice @ Rhodes

In our classes this week, we held our first official symposia, and learned about Immanuel Kant and the categorical Imperative. Applying what we learned today to the social and political thoughts on justice of the last weeks, we encounter certain conflicts. For one, Aristotle understands justice in terms of human interaction, and when an injustice has been done, it needs to be corrected with a system of reconciliatory justice.  But using Kant’s Categorical Imperative, we cannot justify certain reconciliatory actions as moral. Kant’s understanding of moral action dictates that certain actions are immoral, but proving the immorality of an action and the injustice of a situation are different. It is immoral to steal, and therefore Robin Hoods stealing from the rich to feed the poor is Immoral, but is not inherently unjust.  So while Kant’s definition of morality is an excellent standard against which to measure individual actions, it does not accurately provide us with a tool to measure social and political thought. I also have qualms about the thoroughness of his understanding of morality.  While an action can be justified yet immoral, would it not be one’s moral obligation to commit an immoral act to preserve another form an injustice? Viewing morality as a measure against which to make decisions seems irrational when presented with the unfortunate reality of being in a situation where one must commit an immoral action. Does the logic of morality hold any bearing when forced into truly dire situation, or alternatively, inconsequential situations?  Do I not have a moral obligation to lie to the Nazis about Anne Frank’s location, and commit the morally wrong action, but spare my fellow man pain and suffering? Does my choice to run a red light when there is no cop around have significance? Although the future is undefined, and improbable, Man chooses to impose his reality onto it and make certain assumptions so as to function with the passage of time. Why should our system of morality be limited to our inability to exactly define the future? But I suppose I am giving Kant too little credit. After all, his morality is both logical and an excellent goal to strive towards. My criticism only stems from an inability to correspond the morality of my actions to the Categorical Imperative in terms of their absolute role in decision making.