100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Previously searched by you
Previously searched by you
logo
Summary Jurisprudence - Unjust Laws R185,95   Add to cart
Quickly navigate to
Preview
  2.  
  3. Oxford University (OX)
  4.  
  5. Jurisprudence

Summary

Summary Jurisprudence - Unjust Laws
 2 views  0 purchase
  • Course
  • Jurisprudence
  • Institution
  • Oxford University (OX)

Comprehensive summary/exam notes on the topic of unjust laws in Jurisprudence covering two key questions: whether unjust laws are still law, and whether we have an obligation to obey unjust laws. This document sets out differing views and includes in-depth analysis which can be used to structure an...

[Show more]

Preview 1 out of 3  pages

Document information

  • October 7, 2024
  • 3
  • 2022/2023
  • Summary

Subjects

  • jurisprudence
  • theory of law
  • unjust laws
  • obligation to obey unjust laws

Written for

  • Oxford University (OX)
  • Unknown
  • Jurisprudence
All documents for this subject (5)

Seller

avatar-seller
bethjscott5713

Content preview

Unjust Laws
A key distinction needs to be drawn between legal validity and one’s moral obligation to obey the
law.
While unjust laws in any legal system should be recognised as “laws”, the extent to which a
citizen has a moral obligation to obey that law depends on how far the legal system
reasonably resolves coordination problems.
While disregarding unjust laws as laws may lead to anarchy, denying that there is no moral obligation
to obey them does not.
Just because there is no general obligation to obey a law, does not mean there is no
compliance. The two remain fundamentally different concepts.
“Unjust” = not based on or behaving according to what is morally right and fair.”

Are unjust laws still law?
Traditional natural law perspective = No:
Aquinas and Augustine – lex inuesta non est lex (an unjust law is no law at all).
Any law that does not work to the benefit of the common good is by default no law at
all.
Common good is important but in relation to one’s moral obligation rather
than validity of the law itself – distinction should be drawn.
Updated natural law perspective = No:
Finnis – laws are subjective to the individual – one’s personal take on morality is how
laws can be interpreted.
In the case of unjust laws, one’s own morality prevails over the arbitrary laws
which claim to have authority.
Criticisms of this approach:
Rooted in religion – seems less relevant in a modern secular society.
Rests on the assumption that there is an objective moral standard which can be
discerned.
This theory suggests that a law will not be treated as valid unless it passes
some kind of moral threshold.
What are the moral requirements for a just law?
Would have to be entirely objective and would have to be a universal
consensus on the identity.
There is no consensus – can see this through Finnis’ identification of the 7
basic human goods: life, knowledge, sociability of friendship, play, aesthetic
experience, practical reasonableness, and religion.
He presents these as ‘self-evident’.
BUT – is really just concealing his own personal opinion of what
these values should encompass.
Especially religion – going back to point about modern secular
society – not everyone is religious and so for many people, religion
would not be considered a basic human good.
Risk of insufficiently distinguishing between what the law “is” and what the law
“ought to be”.
Exacerbated by Finnis’s approach – trying to make the traditional natural law
approach more palatable but actually just exacerbated the issues.
There is no consensus – everyone has their own view of moral values.
Risk of leading to anarchy – dismantle social order.
If everyone is entitled to disregard law entirely, consider it invalid,
on the basis of their own moral values – completely dismantle social
order.
Soft positivist view = Yes:
Hart – law is a question of social fact.

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through EFT, credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying this summary from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller bethjscott5713. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy this summary for R185,95. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

78834 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy summaries for 14 years now

Start selling
R185,95
  • (0)
  Buy now