Justice as a state of being VS. Justice as a function

              Justice, through Plato’s eyes, is an inherently healthy attribute of the soul or mind. “The just man”, as he describes it, has harmonized the whole of his psyche into three distinguished parts, each with its role to fill in its own space. When properly in sync, they behave with regard to the other parts. Reason contains the Passions and measures the Actions, while the Passions give purpose to Reason and the Actions, and the Actions move the body forward. Plato seems to be determined to think outside the box with his interpretation, drawing a comparison between the “just man” and the smooth functioning of a city, forming the “just city”. The abnormality here is his insistence on defining justice as a state of being rather than as a leveling influence that keeps the peace between people, as it is traditionally described. He seems to believe that if internal synchronicity is built, one cannot fail to be just in action, and he goes as far as to say that a life lived without this dual correspondence, regardless of whether a person can obtain good things or behave justly, cannot be worth living.

              There are a few obvious objections to this thought, the first being that justice does not reside solely with the just. Internal harmony is certainly not a prerequisite to moral behavior, and discord in the psyche sometimes produces the perspective necessary to develop empathy. Equally so, a person does not have to have a moral character to produce moral actions, and to say that such a life is not worth living is belittling to those who find some success in overcoming their more harmful instincts. It is more fitting, then, that abstract notions of justice ought to avoid using the moral character to deflect or subtract from the moral function, that being to deliver to a victim fair satisfaction or recompense for having been harmed by another party. In essence, that is the true justice.