Quote Originally Posted by Papewaio View Post
Actual since it's definition means beyond the physical... Doesn't that leave the physical not needing metaphysics?

Retribution can be just or unjust. That's why I included a variation of he golden rule within my short example of justice i.e. Punish as you would like to be punished.
"Above the physical" might be better, the assumption that the world has a concrete "phyiscal" reality is metaphysical.

"Punish as you would like to be punished" - what if I would not punish someone for child rape? Does that mean I should not be punished, is that Just?

I blame C.S. Lewis for the "Golden Rule", he is th earliest proponent I can trace, no doubt he thought it was a way to make Christianity palatable to the masses (it was in his book "Mere Christianity") - crucially, Lewis was a firm believer in "Natural Law" which is basically the same thing as "natural" Justice.

None the less, as it has been populasied by Karen Armstrong it is a completely relativistic and therefore worthless statement.

The actual "Golden Rule" is:

Love the Lord your God with all your Hear and all your Mind and all your Soul, and Love your Neighbour as Youself.

That is not a relativistic statement, it is unequivical and a much better Creed to live your life by. If You don't like the "beardy" God by all means substitue Einstien's/Spinoza's and the import is preserved.