Studying Law And Moral

Studying Law and Moral

At the beginning of our development as a society, the first civilizations the law and morals were closely united, and in a way it is understandable since the first civilizations were not in the possibilities of differentiating them and being able to conceive it separately, and this we can observe it within the Hammurabi code of those primitive peoples.

In Rome we can also speak that there was no clear difference, and here each of the jurists gave their own meaning Celso considered morality as "the art of good and equitable". Already in the Middle Ages when all power is in the hands of Catholicism, law and moral still continue together, however there is already a small distinction in the issue of morality recognizing it as the "individual good". Likewise, both remained united by a reality ethics

In the Modern Age it is when a distinction between law and morals is consolidated. Tomasio mentions that for the scope of happiness people should be governed by three types of rules

• Rules of good education
• Rules of justice
• Honesty rules

All these rules to say of Tomasio give an inner peace and are able to force the awareness of doing good things, without having a coercive power while we know the right has a coercive power which has the faculty of when a negative thought is externalized , punish it.

The aforementioned by Tomasio was in a certain way recognized by Kant who was one of the philosophers and thinkers who most influenced the modern era.

Kant in a certain way I make the difference more clearly. About morals said that it refers to a matter of internal freedoms of the person himself, that is, when a person submits to morals, who judges him is his own conscience.

Differences between Law and Moral

Among the differences we can find, we speak that at the time of the realization of a legal fact for both one and the other they can have different assessments. When an action is carried out in law there is bilaterality, that is, a creditor and a debtor and this is its fundamental essence, verify if everything is in accordance with the legal system verifying certain formalities according to the provisions of the different statutes. By the Contario, morality is based on the inner motive of an act. Basically there is talk of the regulation of external acts by the norm and the regulation of internal acts by morality. And according to the traders of the time these acts acted in this way

Moral assessment

The right gives an objective appreciation of the situation, that is, it is based on facts that are real and logical, while the other part is based on the subjective issues of individuals, in this the idea of ​​the “act due” arises what what It means that the "must" can be handled ". Our actions, those that we do or may not be carried out by the rest.

The law establishes a relationship with another and thus has a coercive character the force that an action is carried out, while morality does not have this quality, when we talk about moral We are going to the structure of morals, it does not consist of sanction and it is directly linked to coercion, it expressed to us "you must do this". A rule is more moral when it moves away from the structure of law and its sanction.

Characteristics of Law and Moral

The law has an autonomous autonomic value and morals. Now, we refer to this, we can start with the morals and its autonomy that tells us that this is not a product of the will of a third person man as it is in the opposite case of the norm. The will of morality is given of its own law with the condition that it is given universally. Some characteristics of law have

• Not knowing about law is not an excuse for this not to be fulfilled
• Moral meanwhile is valid, even when most people do not have knowledge, or even when they refuse to fulfill it
• Law is hypothetical while moral norm is categorical
• The right only cares when an act is externalized, cares about the temporal end of man.
• Morality is interested in the ultimate end of man
• The law takes into account social change, the evolution of society also the objectivity of certain values
• Morality is handled in two ways one in a formal sense and another in a material sense

LAW

• It has an impact on the act that was externalized
• Acts when it is related to others
• According to its structure, the law carries sanctions
• Look for man’s temporary end
• We can say that in a way it is subordinated to morality, since the acts that are legal are human acts that have been valued by morality
• The end of law is less than the end of morality

MORAL

• Morality has an impact on the internal element of legal action
• Its purpose is the sanctification of man

The way of imposing the subject (autonomy and heteromy)

This has been one of the characteristics that has been giving since ancient times. We talk that morality is autonomous because the subject acts according to his capacity for reason, when a subject acts according to a moral norm, he agrees with this, and his coincidence with the norm itself. So we say that he is subject to his own law. While the other party is heteronomous since the subjects must be based on the legal norm which were imposed, and they were not a coincidence with their own rationality we spoke rather of the rationality of a legislator from which the norm emanates, and it is applied By a competent authority.

An important difference between these two norm is the way of application within society, morality occurs for the individual in a mode of recognition of the same, forces the subject from the subject recognizes morality, ceases to be moral when his conscience does not Recognize that norm as moral.

COERCION

Another distinction that is important to highlight is the use of coercion by these. As we know, the right has the possibility of the use of force for the mandatory compliance of the norm, while in morality consciousness is the one who takes care of that work. We can work the coercion with an example when we go down the street and we do not greet the people who are on the way, in law we cannot be punished, while we can morally be poorly seen and considered as poorly educated people.

Different purposes

The end of law is to achieve adequate functioning of the individual in his social life, for that the norm has been responsible for regulating everything that has to do with the community life of people so that certain actions do not interfere with a manner negative with the rest of society. In a way, we say that morals also have the ultimate goal of maintaining society in a healthy harmony but what focuses mainly on the individual is carried out as a person, in order to find peace inside