Ethics, Morals and the Law
Description
Philosophy of law presents, inter alia, two broad inquiries: the fundamental nature of law and how the law can be evaluated. This program explores the relationship between law and social norms with attention to the moral issues the law generates. Contemporary items from the news will be used to focus discussion on moral judgments and the relevance of morality to human welfare, legal rights, justice, and social responsibility. In the process, an effort is made to distinguish religion from moral philosophy.Essay
Not infrequently, citizens find the law "unfair" or "contrary to common sense" or even "immoral." A significant segment of society believes the civil law is or should be a reflection of their religion. Underlying these reactions is an unspoken, perhaps unrealized, moral code.Citizens, as moral agents, operate under one or more moral codes whether they know it or not. In a complex society — one which claims to honor pluralism while functioning under a majoritarian decision–making system — the hidden moral codes lead to confusion, miscommunication, and social chaos. The conflicts and impaired governmental processes are generated, in part, by the unrealized tension between public and personal morality.
An improved understanding of the relationship between personal and public morality serves to create a more tolerant atmosphere for public discourse, especially in the heated arena of social policy. Further, the quality of communication, and hence understanding, is improved when participants carefully use the language of ethical and moral behavior. And, expectations of government and the law may be more realistic if the limits of legally imposed morality are understood.
The presentation begins by defining terms: "morals;" "ethics;" and "law." It then asks whether there are clearly "right" and "wrong" answers to moral questions; here the audience is asked to answer why people on both sides of the gay/lesbian marriage issue rely on moral certainty in responding to the issue. After surveying audience responses, I trace the same efforts at structuring public policy based on morality, comparing Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) with John Austin (1790–1859). Both of whom shared a belief in "divine law" while acknowledging that there are major differences in the articulation of "God's will." A further contrast is drawn by reference to Immnauel Kant's (1724–1804) rejection of "divine law" and his advocacy for morality based on "categorical imperatives." Finally, I introduce Jeremy Bentham (1784–1832) and his theory of utilitarianism. Note that at this point no reference is made to modern theorist in an effort to avoid association with contemporary controversy.
On this foundation, I offer several observations related to our social and political climate: (1) ethical, moral and legal questions are more easily worked out in a homogenous society (although "evil" may not be eliminated); (2) even when moral principles are commonly shared, application of those principles may be problematic as in the case of a moral obligation to fulfill a "promise;" (3) membership in different social, professional, or religious societies may create conflict where those societies do not share a common ethic and moral code; (4) communities do not always act consistent with the ethical and moral values they claim, causing the young and others to question the moral values of their elders and leaders.
Finally, we turn to law and ask whether law should be made on the basis of ethical beliefs and moral codes. The audience will address that question as they see fit. I will "moderate" the discussion, asking leading questions from time to time, designed to illustrate the points made earlier.
