Remember the umpires? From a couple posts ago. Find it here. I ended the post with a question that I left unresolved for you. In this case, the question was, “Are they all right?”
There is a part of me that says, yes they are all right because their perspective is theirs alone. But I believe they are all only partially right, because they all have to judge what the balls are. They are the umpire, they must interpret the rules or law set before them and pass judgement on a ball when it crosses the plate. If they didn’t do that, we might as well throw the scoreboard out and let everyone ‘win.’
But they are passing judgement on something based on a set of rules. So, how much does interpretation of said rules, play into their decision to call strikes and balls. So far as this discussion relates to baseball, I recall my playing days, and the days I sit and watch about 10 mins of any baseball game. The announcer proclaims this, “Man, that umpire has a pretty big strike zone today!” It should be pretty cut and dry. If this…then this. The theory of relativity should be relevant to those sets of rules set forth by the governing body of baseball. But they aren’t, even though the ‘strike zone’ is given a definition in the rules of baseball. The boundaries of what constitutes a ‘hitable’ ball in baseball are still left up to interpretation by the umpire.
Maybe a better question for the pre-modern, modern and post-modern to ask is, “How do you determine what is just?”