The Arbitrary and Contradicting Nature of Mythological Justice

Since people began talking to each other, judicial administration and the content behind it have been discussed for a long time. Some say that justice is based on fair, legal or moral things, but it depends only on the person who thinks it is fair, legal or moral. In the Aeschylus era, justice was one of the three, and no one was there. Justice itself is inconsistent and it must obey the capabilities of people and God. This can be seen especially in Agamemnon, The Libation Bearers, and Furies. For every story, someone has a different view of justice than before.

The starting point of the rock in deciding justice is that the fraud is "limited by the arbitrary will of others." Therefore, being bound by other people's "arbitrary will" is in a state of justice. Since this situation is a state of freedom, Locke considers justice to be free. As evidenced by his "natural state" concept, Rock shows a very positive view on human nature. Thomas Hobbs, the predecessor of Locke, famously explained the lives of people without communities where individuals live their lives. "Because of loneliness, poverty, hatred, savage, and short-lived". It is an independent and independent creature, but people interact and engage in trade. Most importantly, they will lead the most free lives.

For John Rock (1632-1704), the concept of justice is an important basic theme in his entire political mind. In the case of Locke, natural justice sets restrictions through the concept of natural rights and shows the direction of citizen justice. Furthermore, at the most basic level, the theory of justice in rock is not even natural rights theory. The rights of individuals can not be transferred, but they are still based on the laws of nature and are thus restricted. Locke believes that without personal wealth, there is no justice without property, and justice can not be imagined. The essence of Locke's justice is the safety of all personal property as a right under the law of nature.