These are just a few examples of how society would be harmed without laws. There are many other laws that would also be needed to protect society. It is clear that society needs laws to function properly. In a society without laws, it is difficult to say what would happen. It would be a very different world, and it`s hard to predict how people would behave. However, one thing is certain: it would be much more chaotic and dangerous. So while it may be fun to think about what society would look like without laws, it`s not something we should actually be looking for. It is better to have laws, even if they are not perfect, than to have no laws at all. “Natural laws” are inherent in us as humans. “Positive laws” are created by us in the context of society. Since natural law presupposes universalizing rules, it ignores the fact that different people or cultures may see the world differently. For example, if people interpret differently what it means when something is fair or equitable, the results will be different. In Philadelphia, about 2,000 years after the time of Plato and Aristotle, a group of men attempted to write a constitution.
George Washington, James Madison, and the other framers of the Constitution were dedicated to building a just government. The Americans had overthrown what they saw as a tyrannical British government. The authors wanted to create a national government free from tyranny and governed by the rule of law. If society didn`t have laws, it would be a very different place. People could do whatever they wanted, and there would be no consequences for their actions. This could lead to a lot of crime and violence, as people would not have to fear arrest or going to jail. There would also be no protection for our rights, and we would not be able to hold anyone accountable for their actions. It would be a very chaotic and dangerous world.
Where laws have no authority, there is no constitution. The law must take precedence over everything. two States contained in one, each of which is hostile to the other. [Plato] makes the guards [warriors] a mere garrison of occupation, while husbands and craftsmen and others are the true citizens. But if this is the case, the complaints, quarrels and all the evils that Socrates claims to exist in other states will also exist among them. He is actually saying that citizens with such a good education will not need many laws. But then he limits his education to the guards. A second important type of justice is retaliatory justice or correctional justice. Retributive justice refers to the extent to which sentences are just and equitable. In general, sentences are considered only to the extent that they take into account relevant criteria such as the seriousness of the crime and the intent of the criminal, and do not take into account irrelevant criteria such as race.
It would be barbarily unjust, for example, to cut off someone`s hand for stealing a penny, or to impose the death penalty on a person who accidentally and through no fault of his fault harmed another party. Studies have often shown that when blacks murder whites, they are much more likely to be sentenced to death than when whites murder whites or blacks murder blacks. These studies suggest that injustice still exists in the criminal justice system in the United States. A city of rich and a city of poor, who always live together and conspire against each other. [The government] will not be able to wage war because it is necessary either to arm and deploy the crowd and fear it more than the enemy, or, if they do not use them, to find themselves on the battlefield. And to this must be added their reluctance to contribute money, because they are money lovers. Laws are important because they structure society. They tell us what we can and cannot do, and they have consequences for breaking the law. Without laws, society would be chaotic and people could do whatever they want. This could lead to violence, theft and other crimes. I think the world will be full of criminals, thieves, thieves and kidnappers and killing people is good and kids can play real guns and shoot their mothers and many others until we can no longer call our world a better place because many worse things can happen when laws don`t exist.
When people disagree on what they think should be given, or when decisions need to be made about how benefits and burdens should be shared among a group of people, questions of justice or equity inevitably arise. In fact, most ethicists today believe that there would be no point in talking about justice or fairness if it weren`t for the conflicts of interest that arise when goods and services are scarce and people differ on who should get what. When such conflicts arise in our society, we need principles of justice that we can all accept as reasonable and just standards for determining what people deserve. The accumulation of gold in the treasury of individuals is the ruin of timocracy; they invent illegal forms of spending; Because what does she or her wife care about the law? And then you see someone else get rich competing with him, and so the great mass of citizens become money lovers. And so, finally, instead of loving conflict and glory, people become lovers of trade and money; They honor and admire him, make him reign and dishonor the poor. Leaders must be “servants of the laws” because “law is order and good law is good order.” Because in democracies where laws don`t come first, demagogues pop up. [T]he kind of democracy. [is] what tyranny is to other forms of monarchy.
The spirit of both is the same, and they also wield despotic power over the best citizens. The decrees of the [demagogues] correspond to the edicts of the tyrant. Such a democracy is quite open to the objection that it is not a constitution at all; For where laws have no authority, there is no constitution. The law must take precedence over everything. Philosopher kings will prefer to seek truth rather than rule, but a law will compel them to rule. They will obey the law and alternate as leaders. When a child tearfully exclaims, “It`s not just that. Or when we watch a documentary about the suffering of war, we feel pain because it reminds us of the horrors of human evil. And in doing so, we also provide evidence for the existence of natural laws.
A commonly accepted example of natural law in our society is that it is wrong for one person to kill another person. The rule of law is the principle that no one is exempt from the law, including those in positions of power. The rule of law can serve as a safeguard against tyranny, as just laws ensure that rulers do not become corrupt. Aristotle emphasized that these laws must abide by just principles, so that “true forms of government will necessarily have just laws, and perverted forms of government will have unjust laws.” This law protects people from physical injury caused by others. Without them, people could be attacked and injured without consequences for the attacker. This would obviously lead to a lot of violence and evil in society. Plato examined four existing forms of government and found that they were unstable. The best, according to him, is timocracy, a military state like Sparta based on honor. But such a state will collapse: but to say that justice means giving each person what they deserve does not get us very far. How do we determine what people earn? What criteria and principles should we use to determine what a particular person is entitled to? The poor will overthrow the oligarchy and establish a democracy, the domination of the people (the poor).
Plato believed that “democratic life has neither law nor order.” An insatiable desire for unlimited freedom causes disorder because citizens start stealing is a very common crime, and it would be much more common if there were no laws against it. This is because nothing would stop people from taking what they want, without consequences. Justice means giving each person what they deserve or, more traditionally, giving each person what they deserve. Justice and equity are closely related terms that are now often used interchangeably. However, there was also a better understanding of both terms. While justice was usually used in relation to a standard of righteousness, fairness was often used in relation to the ability to judge without regard to one`s feelings or interests; Fairness has also been used to refer to the ability to make judgments that are not too general, but concrete and specific to a particular case. In any case, the idea of being treated as one deserves is crucial to both justice and equity. Natural law states that there are universal moral standards inherent in humanity at all times, and these standards should form the basis of a just society. Rub impatiently at the slightest touch of authority and length. they cease to deal themselves with written or unwritten laws; You won`t have anyone on you. arbitrary power of an individual. Does not answer to anyone who governs.
for his own benefit, not that of his subjects and therefore against their will. Justice is therefore a central element of ethics and should be duly taken into account in our moral lives. In evaluating each moral choice, we must ask ourselves whether our actions treat all people equally. If not, we must determine whether the difference in treatment is justified: are the criteria we apply relevant to the situation in question? But justice is not the only principle to be taken into account in ethical decisions.