Threats to Justice in Society in the Case of Trayvon Martin

When Plato defined justice as a virtue according to Michael (2002), he believed that an individual has a harmonious soul if they are “guided by a vision of the good” (Michael, 2002). If a soul is harmonious, strong, and beautiful, then actions by an individual are just if they are consistent or sustain such harmony. Julian (1996) stated that justice can also have distributive meaning, in which people “can show equal concern, respect, or treatment of people without them having the same material goods and services” (Julian, 1996). The Trayvon Martin case represents a threat to justice and common ethics because George Zimmerman’s actions were not of a beneficial nature and also because Trayvon Martin was never treated with equal opportunity.

Examining the intentions behind Zimmerman’s actions reveals them as inconsistent with Plato’s philosophy of a harmonious soul. Plato thought individual justice tied to the internal state of the person rather than to social norms or good consequences (Michael, 2002). When Zimmerman called dispatch, he said that Martin looked like he was up to no good, a conclusion he came up to based merely on Martin’s race and clothing. Zimmerman had no logical reason to assume that being African American or wearing a sweatshirt automatically signaled suspicious behavior. His choice to follow and confront Martin was based on his own personal biases.

The way in which Zimmerman confronted Martin also shows a lack of equality in opportunity (Julian, 1996). Martin never had a fair chance to explain himself, not that he should have ever had to. Zimmerman had already made up his mind about Martin when he called dispatch and revealed that he was following Martin. Even when dispatch told him he did not need to pursue Martin, Zimmerman continued his pursuit, resulting in him shooting and subsequently killing Martin. By killing Martin, Zimmerman robbed him of his opportunity to speak for himself, to present his side of the conflict. The courts decided Zimmerman was not guilty because Zimmerman was the only person who had a voice in the case. Was Martin actually acting suspiciously? Alternatively, was Zimmerman guilty of racial profiling and murder?

Finally, Plato sought to show that someone with a healthy, harmonious soul would not lie, kill, or steal (Michael, 2002). By this decree, the Zimmerman case threatens justice by trying to justify Martin’s murder. If Zimmerman had a harmonious soul, he would have listened to dispatch and left the matter to police. Additionally, he would not have called dispatch at all unless he had actually seen Martin engaging in some kind of criminal activity.

References

Julian, L. L. (1996, September 22). Distributive Justice. Stanford University. Retrieved November 4, 2013, from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2013/entries/justice-distributive/

Michael, S. S. (2002, March 8). Justice as a Virtue. Stanford University. Retrieved November 4, 2013, from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/justice-virtue/