We Can Neither Abandon Justice Nor Give Up the Struggle for It!

There is a prevailing view in academia that justice is more prevalent in the West, whereas in our country and other Eastern societies, it is merely an overused and empty glorification. A substantial body of literature examines the functioning of law and societal injustices in both the West and the East, often favoring the West while harshly criticizing the East. In many cases, these criticisms are justified. However, if we frame the issue within the context of the”ideal,” as we have discussed so far, we, too, must have something to say. In particular, we must raise our voices against Western politicians who legitimize the massacres in Gaza.

Everyone speaks of justice, yet we must also acknowledge the difficulty of fully understanding it and defining what is truly “just.” Our readers may recall that in our first article, written when the massacres in Gaza began, we referred to the renowned Jewish legal theorist Hans Kelsen. As if foreseeing and legitimizing the Gaza genocide a century in advance, Kelsen argued that justice is not an essential element of a social order but merely a secondary human virtue. According to Kelsen, justice would remain an unattainable human dream, impossible to define in absolute terms. One of the arguments he put forward was their reconcilable contradiction between “the individual’s right to life as the highest value” and”the interests of the nation, the right to kill in war, and the death penalty.”

However, we strongly oppose Kelsen’s perspective, which distances humanity from its ideals and, in a way, legitimizes oppression. We agree with Kant, who said, “If justice perishes, human life on earth loses its meaning!” Perhaps, as Kelsen argued, justice is an unrealized human dream, but the demand for and pursuit of justice will never cease! Just as we endlessly seek truth, goodness, and beauty, we will also seek justice and strive to establish it—because we are human. Human!

Today, when we speak of “justice” in liberal democratic systems, we primarily refer to compliance with the law. To be a truly just person requires a level of maturity that refuses to place oneself above the law and the legitimate rights of others. Justice is always associated with equality. However, by “equality,” we do not mean uniformity or the elimination of differences, but rather equal rights and equal standing before the law.

The concept of justice is not confined to law alone; it holds an indispensable place in both the philosophy and practice of politics. In politics, terms such as justice, just governance, and just ruler are significant subjects of debate in their own right.

Justice is also crucial for social life. Concepts such as rights, law, and justice are indispensable for human relationships and the functioning of society. Some thinkers argue that justice exists in every community to some extent, for without it, no collective function could be sustained. They are not wrong. Every value requires justice; every society demands it. Without justice, there can be neither legitimacy nor illegitimacy. Moreover, where justice is absent, oppression immediately takes root. To persist indefinitely through sheer oppression is contrary to human dignity and honor—it is simply impossible.

Without addressing the moral and psychological dimensions of justice, without illuminating its place as a virtue within our psyche, we cannot truly understand justice or its highest form, equity. We would also fail to grasp the essence of Aristotle’s statement: “Equity is not what is legally right, but the regulator of legal justice.” Likewise, statements such as “When the rightful cannot be empowered, the powerful are made rightful” or “Interest must bow to justice, not justice to interest” would lose their meaning for us. If we reduce justice solely to legality and equality before the law, we cannot properly discuss what happens when laws themselves are unjust, what must be done in response, or how our psychology reacts. To gras pall this, we must critically reflect on the high-tension line between morality and psychology. Justice must be considered not only as a legal and social necessity but also as a deeply embedded virtue within our psychology.

A judgment or an action may be politically correct and legally legitimate, yet morally inappropriate; it may fail to pass the test of our inner scale of justice. For the political to be truly right and the legal to be genuinely legitimate, morality must also grant its approval. Ifwe do not wish to reduce politics and law to mere technicalities—if we do not want them tobe exercises in manipulation and legal maneuvering—we must understand them in a way that also satisfies the human heart.

Concepts such as “the scale of justice within us” and “the contentment of hearts” may seem foreign to modern people. We are left with two choices: either we abandon these conceptsal together or we subject modernity to critique. My preference, without a doubt, is the latter.

Pleasure and Justice

Modernity has given much to humanity, but it has also taken much away. In recent years, the formula of “pleasure and speed” has been introduced to explain what modernity has distanced humanity from. I, too, believe that these two concepts are crucial in critiquing modernity. When discussing justice, of course, speed is not the focus—after all, the saying “Justice delayed is justice denied“ remains undeniably true. At first glance, pleasure may seemun related to justice, yet a critique of justice through the lens of pleasure is both possible and essential.

In modern times, happiness, contentment, and fulfillment are increasingly defined in terms of momentary pleasure and enjoyment. When the present moment and living for the now are elevated above all else, a chain of disasters is inevitably set in motion. You could never explain this absurdity to the people or thinkers of the traditional world. In traditional societies, a pleasure-driven understanding of happiness was considered strange, even unnatural. What was deemed truly fitting for humanity—what was idealized and worth striving for—was not fleeting pleasure but virtue.

In ancient Greece, when asked “What is the ultimate purpose of moral behavior?”, the common response was “Happiness itself, the highest good.” However, this highest form of happiness has nothing to do with pleasure or enjoyment, as many mistakenly believe today. Instead, happiness was understood in relation to virtue.

For instance, according to Plato, human nature consists of three faculties: reason, spirit, and desire, each corresponding to a specific virtue. The virtue of reason is wisdom, the virtue of spirit is courage, and the virtue of desire is temperance (self-restraint). From the harmony andbalance of these three virtues arises another fundamental virtue: justice.

“Justice is not just another virtue—it is the horizon of all virtues and the law that governs their coexistence.” Plato believed that true happiness emerges from acting in accordance with justice and righteousness, while unhappiness stems from excess and injustice. It is impossiblef or happiness to arise from mere pleasures, material wealth, fame, or power. In short, “Justice does not replace happiness, but there can be no happiness without justice.”

Muslim thinkers, such as Al-Farabi, Ibn Miskawayh, Avicenna (Ibn Sina), Ibn Hazm, Raghibal-Isfahani, and Al-Ghazali, carried forward the virtue-based understanding of happiness found in both ancient Greek philosophy and sacred texts. However, unlike their predecessors and the Western thinkers who later continued along the same intellectual path, Muslim philosophers believed that true happiness is not found in the material world but in the afterlife. For them, the greatest happiness (sa‘ādat al-quswa) was to be attained in the eternal bliss of the hereafter.

The Sense of Justice Resides in Our Conscience and Heart

Having outlined this general framework, let us now return to the topic of justice. Justice is both fundamental and exceedingly difficult to define on its own; it emerges only in harmony with other virtues. If we consider these four fundamental virtues as the guiding principles of human conscience and recognize that it is through conscience that we ascend from mere existence to true humanity, we can conclude that the sense of justice is deeply anchored in our being. Justice is not only embedded in our existence—it also regulates all our actions.

Virtues are discussed within the realm of moral philosophy, but ultimately, it is human beings who bring them to life. When we speak of a virtuous person, we find ourselves navigating the complex terrain of personality and psychology—where missteps are always possible. Even if our judgments and actions are economically beneficial, politically advantageous, or legally legitimate, if they are morally inappropriate or if rigid moralism severs our integrity with other aspects of life, our inner sense of justice immediately intervenes. Indeed, virtues reside precisely within this sense of justice.

The scales that symbolize justice are, in essence, within our inner world. When the balance is disturbed—when injustice prevails—the seismograph of our inner justice scale records it. Our conscience begins to ache. After unjust rulings, it is these inner records, this pain in our hearts, that make us exclaim, “Surely, this cannot be all there is…” and reaffirm our faith in divine justice.

These reflections may help clarify Rumi’s words: “What is justice? It is placing something where it truly belongs. What is oppression? It is placing it where it does not belong.”

Likewise, the statement “It is not justice that makes people just; rather, it is just people who give value to justice. Justice remains meaningful only as long as there are just individuals to defend it.” becomes more comprehensible and tangible to us.

Ultimately, we come to understand that justice is the work of virtuous individuals. And, of course, that our most essential duty in the pursuit of true justice is to raise virtuous people.

“The Only Virtue That Is Absolutely Good“

There is another essential characteristic of justice that we must emphasize. When taken to excess, other virtues lose their virtue and turn into burdens. Generosity is good, but in excess, it leads to waste and harm. Gratitude is good, but only as long as it does not turn into excessive dependence and self-denial. Diligence is good, but only if it remains a struggle for sustenance and responsibility toward oneself, one’s family, and society—without descending into obsessive workaholism.

Similarly, compassion must be understood correctly. In our book From the Heart, we explored this in detail. In our view, compassion, like all other virtues, serves as a foundation for justice—it lies at its very core. Without compassion, without standing by the wronged, the weak, and the oppressed, one cannot truly be just. True compassion never leads to harm. Unfortunately, in today’s world, compassion is often misunderstood. A flawed interpretation—one that equates compassion with excessive leniency—can lead to the absolution of crime and criminals.

But justice is different…

Justice includes all other virtues; therefore, it is never excessive nor insufficient. As André Comte-Sponville put it: “Justice is the only virtue that is good in an absolute sense.” And as Aristotle declared: “Justice is the most perfect of virtues; neither the evening star nor the morning star shines as brightly.”

That is why we must always speak of justice, continuously struggle for justice. We must elevate justice as an ideal that humanity must never abandon, declare that the fight for justice has no end, and pursue justice tirelessly—as if we are forever thirsting for it.

Justice in the West and the East

As we conclude, let us address one final point. There is a prevailing view in academia that justice is primarily a Western concept, while in our country and other Eastern societies, it is merely an overused yet hollow glorification. A substantial body of literature examines the functioning of law and societal injustices in both the West and the East, often favoring theWest while harshly criticizing the East. In many cases, these critiques are justified. However, if we consider the issue within the framework of the ideal, as we have discussed so far, we, too, must have something to say.

In particular, we must raise our voices against Western politicians who seek to legitimize the massacres in Gaza. In my opinion, one of the most concise and profound statements on this matter came from my dear friend, the late Aydın Menderes:

” If we had to sum up concepts like human rights, freedoms, the rule of law, and democracy in a single word, that word would be justice… The justice of the West and the justice of theEast, shaped by the influence of Islam, are fundamentally different. Justice is an a priori concept in the East, whereas in the West, it is a posteriori. In the East, justice is the very meaning of life, the key to both this world and the hereafter, the sole banner of peace. This is why, whether it is practiced or not, justice has always existed in the minds and consciences of the people. In the West, however, the situation is entirely the opposite… Rome prioritized order over justice and was ruthless in doing so. The same is true for all feudal authorities and even the Church itself. During the transition to industrialization, Western imperialism also proved merciless. The continuation of a system in which justice is abandoned, where people trample one another and violate each other’s rights, depends on maintaining imbalances of power between different social classes. In the West, concepts such as human rights, democracy, and law—all of which are deeply connected to justice—are subject to double standards. Justice is necessary among Westerners themselves, but they practice the exact opposite when dealing with other societies and peoples. Islam, on the other hand, commands justice for all of humanity. Justice is a natural principle, both in its demand and its application. Islam is the religion of fitra—the natural order. A person who does not believe in a Creator, who fails to recognize that all people are equal before this Creator, is more inclined toward oppression than toward justice. The concentration of power leads to tyranny, andIslam rejects this.”