a story base on my moral ethic class:
If there was a pizza pie, and there are 8 kids
Should we split the pie fairly and equally
Should we split it to the one who is in need and hungry the most, and youngest
OR last should we split it by base on merits Who has the more skill and who has less to no skills/ or unuseful to provide for the group
edited for title change what is fairness to what is your idea of fairness? Granted.
Read John Rawls for an excellent treatment of fairness. Not the last word, mind you, but a very good first one.
Should we split the pie fairly and equally - no
Should we split it to the one who is in need and hungry the most - yes
and youngest - no
should we split it by base on merits Who has the more skill and who has less to no skills - with children not so much but - yes
this would only be in a desperate survival situation really though, everyone should get fed properly otherwise.
even more factors can be out in, like preference of size, some might want to exchange, having a smaller piece of pizza to gain a bigger piece of pie
the strongest should take the pie for themself and do with it as they wish.
-Imp
The weakest should band together, kill the strongest, eat him, and save the pizza for later.
touche’
LOL
-Imp
while i have not had a chance to read much on fairness, i did like imp’s idea. as i have read quite a bit on groups and leadership, i might see it from a bit of a different perspective. not in the fashion of the bully-like sense of ‘strongest,’ but more like the strongest “negotiator” (and i use that word loosly).
scenario : set a pizza on the table with 4 adults around it. without dividing the pizza up among the 4 adults, 2 slices each for example, we let them figure it out themselves.
typically, a hierarchy of some sort will form as happens in most groups when a goal or decision (requiring action) is posed to them. the natural leader will attract respect and influence the rest in the decision-making process. if the decision is for the benefit of all, it will be accepted. if it favors the minority, the majority will overrule despite going against the leader. there’s a certain line that has to be crossed though.
the group came to a decision about what they will accept and what they will not. everyone received what they thought was “fair.” just like when a vendor sells something to Person A for $10 and then immediately afterwards to Person B for $15. both Person A and Person B agreed to the trade of money for goods. they each thought it was a fair trade otherwise they would not have made it.
in these situations, fairness does depend on ability. ability to pay. ability to eat. ability to sell. ability to efficiently use an item. ability to be knowledgable.
does that make sense?
I think the question should have been phrased.
“What is your idea of fairness” and not “What is fairness” as though fairness as a concept is a universally accepted idea.
We all have our own idea about fairness and there is not one idea of fairness we all share.
My own idea of fairness is when “he reaps what he sows”. If you are really interested in these ideas, watch this British drama, ‘Yes priminister’, the show would definately give you a new perspective on language game.
It was because of J. Rawls I asked the question about fairness, in my philosophy of law class.
My classed talked about Crito. Where why would Socrates choose death over exile? One is obligated to accept the punishment of the law is given, even though it was not fair nor is the judgment made fairly against Socrates. And if Socrates were to choose escape he would be breaking the law, and the foreign land, will look down on him. It seems as he has betrayed his own principles. While, choosing death strengten his principles.
Since the topic has changed. My idea of fairness is equality. IF you treat my judgment as equal to your intellect, then all is fair. The teacher and student equal.
no, socrates thought life was disease. his last words were :we owe a sacrifice to the god of medicine, pay the debt…
-Imp
I would love to believe you IMP
but you hace a reptuation of speaking gibberish, when writing one line sentence or fragments of sort. 
Only adults would think to ask if we should split the pie fairly and equally. The kids, left unsupervised while the adults in the room debated the meaning of ‘what is fair’, would divide the pie and have it eaten long before a consensus was reached.
“Fairness as a concept,” sadly, is not a universally accepted idea, but only because adults have clouded the issue with other considerations that shouldn’t really be part of the equation. Children have in most cases a better understanding of what fair is than adults.
This is in no way meant to imply that every time a child cries out, “That’s not fair,” that we should trust their judgement. They also understand that they are more likely to get what they want if they make things appear other than they are.
Anything that goes my way is fair.
what were socrates’ last words? look them up and tell me what do they mean?
-Imp
his last words were most likely in greek. to say for me to look it up means you are right. And to say for me to look it up serves me no interest then to waste my time.
So therefore I shall assume you are right, without a fight. I turn my cheek around and offer you my other side.
I have no interest in slapping you about… but you may learn something…
-Imp
So I guess Jesus was mad and deserve to be smack on the face until he joins the majoirty way of thinking?
socrates’ last words: “i drank what?”
or as others like to remember: “Crito, we owe a cock to Asclepius. Do pay it. Don’t forget.”
how odd to be thinking of homosexual sex on his death bed … dirty old man.
either bishop is right, and Imp is wrong; Imp is right and bishop is wrong.
Or they both could be wrong. Who is fair to judge?