During Stephanie's presentation she said that in order for a law to be just, it must steer people to become more just. This is interesting to me and made me think about certain laws that I break everyday. Speeding happens to be a big one that I break everyday and I have no concerns about doing it. Disclaimer I rarely go more than 5 over but 5 over is still breaking the law. And since the chance of getting a ticket does not make me obey the law, the question that I raise is whether I am a bad citizen for not following the law or is the law unjust? My opinion is its a little of both. I am a less than upstanding citizens (lets leave the bad citizens for the drivers who are putting others in danger: drunk drivers, people who go 100+ mph, etc.) and I do not lead a good example for others but I am not alone. Anyone who breaks any law set forth by the society is wrong at that time, though there is times in history where there have been immoral and unjust laws and appropriate legal action should be used to change the law. Civil Rights Movement and Gay rights are two major examples in the past half century. (some of the actions taken during the Civil Rights Movements were not appropriate legal action)
And as for the law being unjust, it does seem it would be more advantageous for people if speed limits did not exist, maybe on city streets with lots of traffic but on a highway in west Texas, where nobody lives, is this law necessary or important.
My second stem from this is that speed limits are important and Just for one main reason and this reason is what makes all laws just in my opinion. The speed limit posted keeps people safe from themselves and other drivers whether they are walking along the road or driving. A just law must make the society safer or more advantageous to the whole than if the law was not in place and it must not take rights away from people in the society. A just law must protect the rights of the people and the people from others that would wish them harm inadvertently or on purpose.
This summer I will be working at a law firm that does employment law. The laws that are in place for employment law keep the employers from taking advantage of the employees and interviewees. This makes the laws just because even though they disadvantage the few in this case the employers who already have a large advantage over the employee, they increase the aggregate advantage of the society.
Glad you found so much relevance for daily life and work in Stefanie's presentation.
ReplyDeleteI think one of the best examples of "just laws" is the marijuana debate. Recently, federal drug crimes surpassed murder as the number one reason for imprisonment in the US. With so many people breaking the law, often times repeatedly, is it really just? Of course the laws do have a noble end, which is minimizing drug abuse. However, with all the research being done, many scientists believe that marijuana isn't all that harmful to adults and that it's not physically addictive. Very early crime reports from Colorado have even seen slight drops in violent crime. There are many aspects to the legalization debate, which makes the topic really fascinating.
ReplyDeleteSpringing from both speeding and Conor's comment, at what point does democracy overpower republic? In Plato's Republic, the masses need to be governed by superiors, but if the view of the ruling class is more that they are disjointed from those they rule, are they really representing the masses? Things like the Tea Party movement make for interesting thoughts on how just laws can be if the law makers are almost apart from society.
ReplyDeleteI like the debate over just laws. I think for laws we can enact the "justice as fairness" principle that John Rawls advocates. Whatever is fair goes. Inspiring people to be good and follow goodness can be a byproduct, but in political philosophy, fairness is king. In terms of speed limits, are they exactly just? I think so. Is there any direct harm in speeding a little? Probably not. Am I an unjust person for speeding? I hope not. That would make me a terrible person.
ReplyDeleteSo yeah, for laws we need to use a different interpretation of justice. Aristotle's and Plato's definitions aren't "catch-alls". For modern political theory, justice is best described as fairness.