When the men were rescued, both men were tried for the aggravated crime of murder. If, at first glance, it appeared that a crime had been committed, the case was whether, at that time, the man who was morally right to save his own life could be freed from the chains of the law. However, a clear distinction has been made between law and morality and it has been found that personal inconvenience or trying to save your life by killing someone else cannot be used as justification. In general, morality is the quality of being in agreement with the norms of good or bad behavior. Morality speaks of a system of behavior in terms of standards of right or wrong. The word carries the concepts: (1) moral standards concerning behavior; (2) moral responsibility for our conscience; and (3) a moral identity or person capable of doing right or wrong. Morality has become a complicated issue in the multicultural world we live in today. Timeless wisdom explains that there can be no complete law without the effect and inclusion of morality. My project explores what Moore`s concept of morality is and how it explains its impact on our behavior, our conscience, our society, and our ultimate destiny.
The law and morality are too vague to understand. It should be added here that the concepts of law and justice cannot be grasped and presented in a few sentences. These terms are too broad for even words to be enough to define them. Many jurists, from Greek antiquity to modernity and even postmodernism, have made many attempts to define these concepts, but have failed. One reason could be that the roots of these concepts lie somewhere in the human psyche, which is extremely random and versatile. Well, it is necessary to describe the principles of the two main schools of law. Legal positivism: The beginning of the nineteenth century can be considered the beginning of the positivist movement. The term positivism has several meanings, which are compiled by Professor H.L.A. Hart as follows: 1.
Laws are orders. This meaning is associated with the two founders of British positivism, Bentham and his disciple John Austin, 2. The analysis of legal concepts is as follows: * it is worthwhile * to distinguish oneself from sociological and historical surveys, * to distinguish from critical evaluation, 3. decisions can be logically derived from given rules without resorting to social, political and moral objectives, 4. moral judgments cannot be established or defended by arguments, evidence or rational evidence, 5. the law, as actually established, Positum, must be separated from the law that should be. The school of positive law has its main pillars like, Jermy Bentham, John Austin, Prof. H.L.A. Hart, Kelson.
Indeed, positivism was born from the ashes of Europe`s resurgence. It is therefore a liberal thought or ideology whose main objective is to bring about positive reforms in society through the instrument of the state and not through the clergy. What positivism represents is the intellectual response to naturalism and the love of order and precision. After getting a brief idea of legal positivism, we should move on to natural law school. Natural Law School: – The term “natural law”, like positivism, has been applied differently by different people at different times. 1. Ideas that guide legal development and administration. 2. A fundamental moral quality in the law, which prevents a complete separation of the “east” from the “should”. 3.
The method to discover the perfect law. 4. The content of the perfect law, which can be deduced from reason. 5. Conditions sine quibus non to the existence of a law4. The best way to answer the question of how the law relates to morality is to be dealt with by a judicial duty that binds judges in their role as judges, and then to further examine how judges should apply morality to decide contentious legal cases. How to properly integrate morality into judicial decisions? The idea of understanding legal reasoning is to consider the “obvious law.” This can be illustrated by some of the examples he cites. When laws entrust custody of minor children to a parent, it is most likely in the best interests of the child to grant citizenship only to applicants of good character to deport those convicted of crimes of moral rejection. This shows that judges in legal systems with obvious rights such as ours must make moral choices in applying those laws to the cases before them.
With the power of the state behind them, they force people to give up their money, their freedom and their lives. Such coercion requires justification, which is, of course, the (obvious) law that establishes certain doctrines of legislative primacy and prohibition of common law crimes. Certain political ideals, such as democracy, separation of powers and the rule of law, make these doctrines a source of judicial obligations. The school of natural law dominated until the nineteenth century, starting from the ancient Greek period. The natural law school discussed what law is, etc., but never discussed law as an empirical formula and never made a strict distinction between what law is and what law should be. Natural law thinkers, when they speak of law, speak of laws made conscious by the mind of man, as opposed to laws made as a result of morality without a conscious element. Natural law thinking is one form or another ubiquitous and occurs in different contexts. For example, as has been emphasized, values play an indispensable role in the development and day-to-day administration of justice. In another field, natural law theory has sought to meet the primordial needs of successive ages throughout history and has explained how it supports power or the freedom of power according to the social needs of the time. Another natural law school offers indirect assistance to two contemporary problems, namely abuse of power and abuse of liberty.
Positivism, on the other hand, in trying to isolate legal theory from such considerations, refuses to fight where the struggle can be wise, perhaps to its own discredit, depending on one`s point of view. Natural law thinkers have always regarded the principles of morality as a higher law and regard man-made law as contempt and ridicule. Law and morality have always been in conflict with each other. The positivists, led by Bentham and Austin, deliberately kept justice and morality outside the scope of the legal system. Their formalistic attitude refers to the law as it is, not the law as it should be. They focus on the right to source and implementation. Thus, the natural law system depends on norms and norms of morality to formulate a law, while the positivist legal system depends on the conscious and conscious attempt at legislation. This article was written by Amulya Bhatia of Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA. This article deals with the relationship between law and morality and the conflicts that arise from this relationship. Throughout history, no clear distinction has been made between law and morality. Due to a lack of distinction, all laws originated in what was considered morally correct by people in a society.