Essay, Research Paper

The Imposition of Law as Free Will

The Myth of the Social Contract

The Social Contract is defined to be the method by which a people agree to the systematic restriction of their rights for the intent of deriving governmental protection. It is the theory that all people agree to the infliction of jurisprudence and the limitation of their personal freedoms in exchange for safety. The founding dogma of the Social Contract is that people agree to the restriction of their natural rights for the benefit of governmental protection. Yet most frequently in a on the job society can one see that many people do non hold to the subjugation of jurisprudence ; instead, that they rebel against it. The Social Contract is meant to warrant governmental subjugation by stating that people consent to, so support it. The thoughts expressed in this theory, though, are non reflected within the working of a existent society. Many people, though they frequently may non represent the bulk, really defy the infliction of jurisprudence because they refuse to give up their natural rights to a authorities that they perceive to be a threat to their autonomy and a menace to their safety. The Social Contract attempts to portray the province as the free will of world. Yet persons do non accept to the regulation of their authorities, instead it is imposed upon them. Children are taught regard for the jurisprudence and authorities but, as grownups, they are non given the ability to do a rational determination on whether or non to accept them. As clearly stated by Joseph Raz in his text? The Duty to Obey the Law? ,

? The duty to obey the jurisprudence is a general duty using to all the jurisprudence? s topics and to all occasions to which they apply. To look for an duty to obey the jurisprudence of a certain state is to look for evidences which make it desirable, other things being equal, that one should make as the jurisprudence requires. ?

Peoples are non allowed the ability to logically analyse the justifications for the regulation of jurisprudence and the being of authorities ; they are forced simply to accept them. So non merely does jurisprudence enforce ideals without giving justification ; it besides imposes itself without justification. Law does non let itself to be vulnerable to unfavorable judgment ; alternatively of leting people to judge it by its virtues and weaknesss jurisprudence forcefully imposes itself, without consent based on analysis and apprehension. The Social Contract purports that people who agree to the infliction of jurisprudence upon them do so in exchange for the protection of the authorities. Still, as one can see, in reality authorities frequently fails, so ne’er efforts, to protect its ain people. The intent of jurisprudence and penalty is to & # 8220 ; protect & # 8221 ; the people, but the fact that penalty demand be imposed merely illustrates the fact that it does non protect. Punishment is imposed merely after harmful actions against society have been carried out. In order for penalty to be applied there first must be a crime- an action that is authorities & # 8217 ; s duty to forestall from taking topographic point.

When jurisprudence is applied authorities has already failed to protect the person ; penalty will make nil to assist the victim after they have been victimized. Law does non, in truth, prevent such behaviour ; it merely deals with it one time it has occurred. Law does nil to forestall socially harmful behaviour ; it hence does non protect in conformity with the dogmas set Forth in the theory of the Social Contract. Governmental subjugation is justified by stating that people agree to it but, in truth, people are non given the opportunity to hold or to differ ; authorities is imposed instead than chosen. Choice is hence replaced by the jurisprudence and the free will of the person replaced by the actions of the authorities. It is done authorities that many people become capable to ideals they would ne’er accept, actions they would ne’er back up, and people they would ne’er esteem. The Illusion of Extension Government has been purported as the will of the people. It is believed that the will of the people is manifest in governmental actions. Too many persons feel as if they can really impact governmental policy and themselves regulate governmental actions. Peoples have been led to believe that they are the authorities. People somehow feel that, because of the ballot, they can really command the determinations of their authorities. The people have been manipulated into believing that they are the authorities and that they make the picks that determine the destiny of their state. Yet, realistically, what power can one adult male clasp over 270 million? What is one voice among such a battalion? The common individual, merely seen by the authorities as a bead in the ocean, can make nil and can impact nil with the ballot. Through the ballot, an enlightened homo being, so like a individual bead in the ocean, can make nil to keep back the tidal moving ridges of ignorance. Too frequently can one see that the will of the bulk, every bit good as the will of the minority, is ne’er carried out by the authorities. Even when the ignorant multitudes push for alteration the authorities still refuses to follow up on the people & # 8217 ; s demands. Those in power have little to fear from the weak including those voices that are heard need fright nil from those who can non talk. This is the political province of America, so of all states ; the people are non the beginning of governmental power, instead, they are the topics of it. The citizens of this state have someway been led to believe that they are non merely ordinary citizens ; they are the politicians who pass the Torahs, the Judgess who sentence the & # 8220 ; guilty, & # 8221 ; and the constabulary who beat down the minority.

? Rawls reminds us that the civil disobedient suffers incommodiousness, disbursal, twits, menaces, existent danger, and finally penalty. His willingness, in the typical instance, to endure these effects helps to show that his intent is to protest an unfairness or a wrong- non to accomplish an immediate addition for himself. ?

This is the semblance of extension that all people hold. Somehow the American authorities has been able to gull its people into believing that, out of the cavities of ignorance, they can widen their volitions to impact the authorities and the state ; that, someway, their lame heads can direct the fate of this state. The powerless have been led to experience powerful, and because of this they have non been inclined to seek the influence and power that their authorities has stolen from them. The ballot is little more than a political technique of keeping governmental stableness. The intent of the ballot is, non merely to take people to believe that they are the authorities, but to do people to experience as if they, because they have used the ballot to elect certain functionaries into office, are themselves responsible for what the authorities has done. If people are displeased with governmental actions the being of the ballot leads them to seek to modify the governmental leading instead than the authorities itself. The incrimination is shifted from the progressive and corrupt construction of the authorities and placed upon those who lead it. The ballot restricts perceptual experience of ideals that go beyond the stiff governmental construction. Peoples hence wish to prosecute governmental alteration in stead of societal revolution. The people, who frequently wish for alteration in an unchanging construction, are led to superficially modify the governmental leading instead than stop the societal ailments that devastate their lives. Voting creates the semblance of pick ; it leads those who have no freedom to experience as if they are free. The ballot is nil more than a determination fabricated by the authorities. It is a determination that, when made, yields no consequence. It makes people experience as if they are commanding the authorities instead than being controlled by the authorities. Making this illusive determination is nil more than an credence of the governmental construction and the position quo. To vote is to accept the immoralities that plague society. Free will and self-government, the Dominance of Choice and the Social Condition. What is it that determines a individual & # 8217 ; s actions? Are the actions of an person determined by the dictates of jurisprudence and authorities or, instead, is an person compelled to move in certain ways for other grounds? Can a individual & # 8217 ; s actions genuinely be controlled by the restraints set Forth by the jurisprudence? What is it that influences a individual & # 8217 ; s actions? Can jurisprudence, a huge and confusing set of governmental dictates, genuinely keep more influence over a individual & # 8217 ; s actions than can their ain moral political orientations? Can an single, who must do determinations on a day-to-day footing, invariably turn to jurisprudence for behavioural counsel? Individual actions are non compelled by the jurisprudence but instead by morality and by an single & # 8217 ; s personal belief of what is right. Human behaviour is driven by pick. Law attempts to take away that pick ; jurisprudence efforts to forestall people from holding the ability to command their ain actions. Law intends to do behavioural determinations for the people instead than leting them to do their ain moral picks. It is here that jurisprudence infringes upon the most basic rights of the human race and where jurisprudence violates the natural gifts of world. Law attempts to automatise world by alleviating persons from the & # 8220 ; burden & # 8221 ; of doing their ain determinations. Choice must ever rule over jurisprudence, but pick can be over-ridden by environment. Regardless of moral political orientation an person can be compelled, so forced, to move contrary to their moral beliefs when faced with unacceptable societal fortunes over which they have no control. Law, while seeking to eliminate personal pick, maintains the societal ailments that circumvent moral political orientation. Law seeks to do the single nil more than an zombi ; programmed by governmental dictates and compelled by environmental conditions. For an person to be free they must non merely have the absolute ability to do their ain determinations, but they must besides populate in an environment which does non drive them to move in socially unacceptable ways. Law has defined all unacceptable behaviour as the consequence of human pick and so has chosen to disregard, so justify, the being of endemic societal jobs which over-ride pick and morality. Because jurisprudence endangers single freedom it endangers the really construct of humanity itself. What, after all, is a individual who can non believe, who can non take, who can non move of their ain agreement? Responsible Choice and self-denial when an person & # 8217 ; s behaviour is non adversely affected by their environment it is their personal pick which determines their actions. Law can non be imposed as a replacement for morality, nor can it be accepted as the reply to all of life & # 8217 ; s determinations. An single must do their ain picks to be free ; they must hold the ability to grok, analyze, and understand morality. Dictation entirely can non do for freedom, nor can it

of all time be imposed as a replacement for instruction and morality. If a individual is to be genuinely free they must hold the ability to do their ain determinations. Therefore, if a society is to hold both freedom and peace, the people must be in a status in which they can do whatever picks they wish, but where they besides have the instruction and duty to do the right determinations. Education, unlike jurisprudence, is non a limitation, but a usher. Education is a positive behavioural influence that promotes freedom and instills morality. For an person to be free they can non be controlled in any manner, save being influenced by their ain moral political orientation. The invasive limitations of jurisprudence can non be reconciled with freedom. If an person is to be genuinely free so the lone control that can be exerted upon them is their ain self-denial. If absolute freedom is of all time to be in society so instruction and morality must be instituted as replacements for jurisprudence. An single must non be coerced into their behaviour, instead, they should take their actions based on the moral virtues of the actions and non on the unreal effects imposed by jurisprudence. This is demonstrated in the theory of sensible uncertainty.

? If a adult male under 24 has a sensible cause to believe that a miss was over the age of 16 old ages, he has a good defence. The jurisprudence regards the offense as sufficiently serious to do it one that is triable merely by a justice at assizes. ? Reasonable cause? means non simply that the male child candidly believed that the miss was over 16 old ages of age, but besides that he must hold had sensible evidences for his belief. ?

The topic demonstrated that the jurisprudence has looked upon his free will and his determinations in an inauspicious manner, despite the fact that he believed that he had done nil incorrect. Society? s ethical motives have in bend charged him. A individual must be able to understand and acknowledge the morality in specific actions ; this is where freedom lies. Law does non advance understanding nor does it let analysis ; it hence does non let freedom. Will an person, if bing in ideal fortunes, exhibit socially unacceptable behavioural aberrance ( i.e, violent activity ) ? Will a knowing, morally endowed, spiritually enlightened human being, populating in a province of absolute freedom, and uninhibited by the inauspicious influences of endemic societal ailments, exhibit the kind of behaviour that jurisprudence claims to restrict? One can simply look to the workings of present society for replies to these inquiries.

Even today there are many people who, though life amongst society & # 8217 ; s disking influences, do exhibit socially acceptable behaviour. These people will most frequently be those who are good educated and were brought up in a comparatively acceptable environment. Looking within present society one can see that, even with the bounds imposed by our societal ailments, an environment can be sustained which promotes socially acceptable behaviour. What so may go on when all people are allowed the luxury of life in such an environment? What will go on when all people are allowed the degree of instruction which, today, merely the elite have the ability to obtain? This will be the true Utopia: a topographic point where all people have the absolute ability to do their ain determinations, but have the instruction and morality to do the right 1s. One may differ that instruction can truly steer an single & # 8217 ; s behavior so dramatically. Yet one can simply utilize a simple analogy to squelch such dissension. Imagine that a pupil has been assigned a math job. A knowing pupil, who clearly comprehends all the mathematical constructs required to work out the job and understands and can transport out the appropriate computations to make a solution, will doubtless work out the job. Such a pupil has a steadfast appreciation of the necessary cognition required to work out their job. So it is with a knowing person who must confront many of life & # 8217 ; s determinations. A individual who has been good educated and understands the needed societal and moral constructs will doubtless make the right decision and so will take to move in the socially positive mode. Their apprehension will necessarily steer them towards what is socially right. The mathematical analogy can besides be extended to embrace and exemplify the ends of legal philosophies every bit good. What if the pupil does non understand the needed constructs needed to work out the job and so chooses simply to memorise the replies and computations so that they will hit good on an test? Such a pupil will hold no apprehension or instruction. Though they will be able to accomplish a good mark they will understand nil of what they have done. They will non hold analyzed and understood the job and holding simply followed a written illustration to convert others that they have. Nor will the pupil have the capableness of widening cognition to farther applications, since they have no cognition at all. They will hold merely a memorized set of symbols and Numberss that they do non grok. Such a pupil is correspondent to the uneducated citizen. Their authorities will state them, through dictated legal philosophies, in what mode they must carry on themselves. Such a individual will hold no instruction, no apprehension, no morality, and hence no freedom. Such a individual will non be a individual ; it simply will non be.

In decision, this essay has raised more inquiries than it may hold answered. What must go on when people are allowed to exercise their full scope of natural freedoms? Will society autumn into lawlessness and pandemonium or, instead, will society be in a province of peace and harmoniousness as has ne’er earlier been experienced? Envision a society where every individual has been endowed with instruction and moral duty. How can such a society even face the menace of force? What need have the educated for force? Violence is the tool of the ignorant. It is a usage of physical strength to counterbalance for a deficiency of rational strength. It is the tool of those who have no moral direction ; those with moral political orientation spurn force. Violence can non happen without cause. In a society where there is no cause or intent for force, force will merely non be. Social instability is the consequence of inequality ; a status where a few clasp power, wealth, and cognition while the remainder of society stagnates in poorness and ignorance. Can at that place be societal instability, though, in a society where every individual has the power to command his or her ain life ; where every individual is affluent ; where every individual is educated? The menace of force and societal instability heralds merely the demand for alteration. What must be changed, though, when society has attained flawlessness? Violence, and other societal ailments like it, are merely the hallmarks of the imperfect society ; a society where the person does non hold the freedom to do their ain determinations, nor the instruction to recognize they have no freedom. How can freedom be a danger to anything but subjugation, ignorance, and instability? How can freedom do pandemonium? It is sometimes thought that human existences, when separated from society, are nil more than animate beings. Yet this theory arises from the heads of those who have ne’er tasted true freedom, who do non understand what it means to stand before the infinite sweep of possibility that comes merely with the acquisition of absolute freedom. The true nature of adult male can ne’er be known so long as the loads of subjugation and tyranny weigh to a great extent upon his psyche ; so long as the philosophies of jurisprudence automatise his head ; so long as the junior-grade patriotism of authorities clouds his eyes. Mankind will ne’er cognize his bosom so long as it can non crush. It is merely when the human race gustatory sensations of freedom that society can cognize true peace. Merely when every individual is brought to that pure status of nature that world will truly cognize his humanity. Freedom is stableness ; so long as human existences are no more so caged animals within the confines of jurisprudence there can be no peace. So long as all people look upon life through the bars of limitation there can be no stableness. What, after all, is societal instability but a individual blindly ramping to interrupt from their coop? Social promotion freedom is necessary for promotion. It is for the rational development of the human race. Without freedom human development ceases, possibly even degenerates ; for how can a human being evolve to greater highs of humanity when they are no longer human? How can a being journey to new degrees being when they do non be at all? Advancement, as is normally thought, is non technological every bit much as it is rational. Human promotion does non take topographic point every clip a new auto is designed or faster computing machine built ; advancement takes topographic point with the origin of new thoughts into the human consciousness. Advancement takes topographic point merely when human existences are better able to understand their milieus, their being, and their lives. Advancement takes topographic point as the human head springs from one degree of understanding to another and as our perceptual experience of life becomes more and more clear. Under the limitations soon imposed upon it mankind can non progress. How can one roll the huge sweep of possibility when caged within the bars of present society? Advancement requires freedom ; the freedom to believe, the freedom to move ; merely the freedom to be human. Because freedom has been redefined within the restrictive boundaries of jurisprudence the human head inadvertently wastes off in stagnancy. Now the human head wastes off within the confines of jurisprudence as an animate being pacing wildly in its coop. The flicker of humanity turning of all time dimmer in the eyes of every human being, so like the animal whose wild freedom has been stolen and whose will to populate easy fades off. Life is barren of kernel and becomes nil more than a hollow being in a inactive province of being. So like the animate being who has lost the ability to freely roll the huge sweep of nature so excessively will the human head waste off into void within confines of its ain fashioning. Within the abdomen of that great Leviathan whose really existence depends on the subjugation of the human psyche. We live in a clip when the human race, surrounded by technological admiration, is itself going technological ; human existences now little more than machines, programmed by the philosophies of authorities, compelled by the fortunes of environment. It seems as though one could merely press a button and snuff out the flicker of life that glows, now of all time so faintly, in the eyes of every human being ; as if one could simply convey to a arrest the mechanism that world has become. A individual can non be without freedom ; it is a status of humanity that a individual be free. Possibly world will, one twenty-four hours, conveying himself into being ; or possibly he will merely melt off, holding ne’er been more than a shadow of a idea in the head of the Creator ; holding ne’er genuinely existed at all.