Is Mercy Reverse Injustice or Reverse-d Injustice?
The problem, so easily, is that: To have Mercy is to abuse against myself,i.e: to loss, or to give up some rights of mine to the real abuser or the real oppressor or whoever does the act of Injustice.
This means that I manipulate the act of Injustice against myself.
Accordingly, to define Mercy as:
Reverse Injustice, is somehow inaccurate.
The accurate definition is this:
Reversed Injustice.
i.e: Mercy is already Injustice but against yourself or the oppressed, by giving up rights which are yours or the oppressed.
So, philosophically, we may say: Mercy is Reversed Injustice motivated by compassion and forgiveness.
This means that I manipulate the act of Injustice against myself.
Accordingly, to define Mercy as:
Reverse Injustice, is somehow inaccurate.
The accurate definition is this:
Reversed Injustice.
i.e: Mercy is already Injustice but against yourself or the oppressed, by giving up rights which are yours or the oppressed.
So, philosophically, we may say: Mercy is Reversed Injustice motivated by compassion and forgiveness.
Comments (2)
Mercy positions the injustice and all of its baggage in the past. To have mercy is to see the potential in someone regardless of past behaviour, and to act according that potential instead of defining a person according to the injustice they have done (ie. ‘the abuser/oppressor’).
Mercy is acknowledging that pain, loss or humiliation has brought all of us to this point (compassion), and then resolving not to add to it in the future by evoking any perceived ‘right’ to retribution (forgiveness).