There is no justice outside (or without) law.
So does the definition of justice.
> vigilante justice
Except 'vigilante justice' and 'justice' are concepts that have little to do with each other. You might as well be talking about the 'de facto law' (like for instance the "law" enforced by the local mafia) vs. the 'de jure law' here.
That depends on how well different people's definitions of justice line up. There are many things that vigilantes can enforce pretty well.
> You might as well be talking about the 'de facto law' (like for instance the "law" enforced by the local mafia) vs. the 'de jure law' here.
Sure, why not? Mafia law is often not justice, but I think it qualifies as law where sufficiently powerful. You seem to think this argument debunks itself?
If reputation and peer pressure scaled to group sizes bigger than Dunbar's number (i.e. about a hundred or so) then we probably wouldn't need laws at all.
I suppose you one might say that social expectations are just another kind of law, in which case, yeah it's hard to imagine any group of people without some kind of expectations of how each other will behave. That's kind of the basis of human relationships.
* A society of one.
* A society of one family isolated in nature, where each member is allowed to express their peculiarities and eccentricities, but never do each other any harm - not because of established rules, but because they truly love and care of each other.
The second example is virtually unreal (and even expressions of 'love' and 'care' can be harmful).