You use words like “justice” and PBA says “natural law” but all I see is circular reasoning. If this is justice, or natural law, explain why we it is a good thing to have justice or natural law. And do it in a way that demonstrates why they are not just new words for the impulse for revenge.
Sure, I’ll do that.
So humans are made with certain emotions and certain natural feelings about how the world ought to work.
Like for example, ownership: It is completely natural that people think that there are things which you own and that if somebody takes it from you they are doing something wrong. It doesn’t need to be that way, and indeed philosophers ask why it is that way. And the philosophers invent all sort of apologetic reasons why it is that way–but it is all just trying to describe something which they know exists. And when you read their arguments, you come away feeling very unconvinced–because they are refusing to acknowledge that it is that way just because we naturally feel that way.
People are made that it makes sense to us that a crime needs to be punished, even if the crime wasn’t done to us. And that the way we express that something is wrong is by saying that it has to be punished. And I think that is a good thing.