Saturday, January 23, 2016

Laws of moral physics

Do we need to understand art to appreciate it? If you're going to say yes, you'll have to answer my next question. How do people who don't get the nuances of music able to enjoy it then? Why do we tap our feet or snap our fingers while listening to good music? Our utter lack of basic knowledge, let alone expertise, doesn't get in the way of us relishing what our eardrums catch. 

Now, hold this thought here please. 

What about justice? Do we really need to know the laws to infer what's just or what isn't? The most natural answer to this query would be, yes. But aren't something just beyond human intellect? And there are thousands of unexplained cases that makes us introduce us to our judicial limits. Take Talvar (2015) for instance. Although it's a brilliant film, you can't deny that it's biased towards the parents. Even those who followed up the double-murder case for almost a decade would agree that the case isn't straightforward. The same is true for Making A Murderer (2015). No matter how much you try to figure it out, you'll find roadblocks in Steven Avery's guilt as well as innocence. 

Which begs the question, do we need to understand humans to re-establish tenets of humanity? Or is it all circumstantial?

No comments: