Justice

Though sound sort of ethical cliche, fairness must be dealt with in most social results. Its failure can be a deadly blow to a society. While the issue arises naturally in a society, it comes in shades and doesn't has to be egalitarianistic. In terms of historical evidence and proper juristic rationality, antitrust settings, be them political, economical or social, have to be there in modern society.

The advancement of technologies and the increase of ensuing risks are turning international justice into something non-reactionary. While promoting their idea of justice, employment of due process has to be prudent, or else, developed countries may turn our global village into a jail.

In our highly automated world, Rawls-Sunstein's theory of justice should be highly regarded. Rawls propounds a version of non-egalitarianistic political liberalism that is further derivative of a rational, hypothetical and non-metaphysical "original-position". Basically agree with his maximum liberty and fair equality of opportunity principles but not "the difference principle" as it is clearly contradict with his "veil of ignorance" methodology by which neither preference for majoritarian nor minoritarian should be allowed. Nevertheless, a just society must protect the fair minority interests; it's just protection, no more or less. Otherwise, as both majoritarian and minoritarian tend to push their own benefits to extreme, political crisis could easily be aroused. Nonetheless, if the minority is pushed to a corner, they have every rights of self-defense.

Deliberative democracy of Sunstein displays commitments toward public-regarding reasons in public decision-making process, to civil society, contractarianism and against unfair group/individual influence. A version of neo-pragmatic meritocracy need be there for adjustment. Fairness is still the key; unfair contractual terms or practice can defeat their validity. As society turns high-risk, emphasis on scientific health need be injected into the process.

Antitrust and Seen Justice
Seen Justice is derived from the maxim "justice must be seen to be done". It denotes proper settings or arrangements for possible fair results and can be said as the basis of antitrust reasoning. Its absence betokens injustice. For instance, the controversy of long-term dominance of a political power can be easily solved when the legislature, judiciary, executives and media workers are mainly supporters appointed by the dominant power.

Health & Properness

Health is also another essential benchmark for a result. It integrates with liberty; no liberty, no health. (*4TWCRBTL/PIT, this means restriction effected upon a sick person naturally. ) The neopragmatic moksa: body is emancipated only with health. The health is scientific and properly result-oriented. While it is not entirely anti-morality, the healthy properness is not subjected to moral competition or self-righteousness. It embraces both macro and micro perspectives.

The healthy properness has to be basically scientific (where options of value can emerge for deliberations), especially reliable statistics and psychology, in order to reduce controversy. It is neopragmatic version of political correctness and thus antitrust or against unitarianism.

(*4TWCRBTL/PIT=For those who can`t read between the lines or purposely ignore them.)

Liberty

The result-oriented liberty has to go beyond law. It looks for a civil society with environmental friendly and overall healthy results. Law would seem metaphysical if the environment is not healthy; no health, no liberty.

Neopragmatic Creativism

The creativism is to have features for systemic differentiation. Besides differ, refer and defer in new ways, it also takes care of the possible interpretations &/ effects. By outstripping the complexity threshold, it can be, business-wise, a proper barrier of entry for others or sort of blue sea politically correct. This correctness clearly should not apply to (neo/quasi)fascism.

Methodology and Ontology

Methodology has clear features in contrast with ontology. Indeed, they are different things. Methodology is method-regard text; ontology, essence-regard. Sound like superfluous statements? Yet, the mistakes of mixing them up happens in highly acclaimed works such as Being and Time of Martin Heidegger.

On Ideology

Ideology has multiple-choice of meanings. In the context here, ideology is not merely idea, ideation or system of idea. Endowing with metaphysical and hegemonistic rhetorics, its semantics refer and defer in such away that can enchant people into believing without or dare not resort to proper reasoning and criticism, or can be sort of implanted in believer's mind. This sort of blind-faith is clearly not the nature of pragmatism. Historical lessons such as witch-hunts and Cultural Revolution teach us this sort of ideology is, if not more, every bits as precarious as nihilism. Nevertheless, this does not ensue that it can't be de-ontologistized and be a spatial-temporal, politically correct tool.

Both materialist and idealist pragmatism are error-prone. The former tends to be profit-oriented and damaging the environment. The latter can tilt toward building Babel Towers and extremely hypocritic. What we need is something paying regard to them, not "believing" in them, yet to have proper sustainable results.

Philosophers do not have to worry that this will drive a nine-inch-nail into the heart of philosophy. Definition of philosophy has never been stable. Contingently speaking, so long as there is thought reflexion, there is philosophy.