Once again James Marsters proves he's a very sensible fellow (i.e. I agree with most of what he says ;).

(although forgiveness is a human idea too - in yer face Pope ! ;) - and I don't agree that justice is ultimately unobtainable - if people feel justice has been obtained then it's been obtained, that's part of it being a human idea. In the same way that if someone genuinely forgives another person then that person is genuinely forgiven, otherwise, not)

Saje | December 16, 17:23 CET

The problem in both forgiveness and justice, is that it's mostly emotional, that is: not rationalized. One could argue that, in that sense, neither can be ever obtained; because there'll always be somebody who doesn't feel forgiven (or forgiving); or who disagrees that justice has been done (who, for example, would have wanted a higher or a different sentence). Etcetera.

(how's that for an off-topic...)

Puck | December 16, 19:00 CET

Well, we're talking about what he said, seems on-topic to me ;).

In reality I agree Puck (particularly once the apparatus of state - legal systems etc. - become involved), you can't usually please all of the people all of the time. But it's pretty easy to imagine a situation where there's one aggrieved party and one perpetrator and the perpetrator either gets what both consider to be a proportionate punishment or is forgiven by the victim and feels they were sincere. I.e. it's not necessarily the case that justice/forgiveness is unobtainable, it's not true in principle IMO, it's just really likely to be the case (justice and forgiveness are possible but not easy in other words).

Saje | December 16, 19:59 CET

This really is a profound interview.

[ edited by cleveland on 2010-12-17 09:37 ]

cleveland | December 17, 09:37 CET