Law And Morality

The question of the relation between law and morality has always engaged the attention of the political and moral thinkers since ancient times. Aristotle posed it in an interesting manner when he asked whether a good man was a good citizen or not. It really goes deeper still, as Aristotle was fully aware, because it is fundamentally a question of the relation between Ethics and Politics. It is, indeed, an important question, because it is sometimes asserted, especially in backward societies, that morality and law are identical and that every immoral act should be legally punished or

forbidden. In other words, people can be made morally good by law and legal punishment. In order to understand such questions, we must find out the relation and distinction between morality and law. Morality is understood in two senses: positive morality and ideal morality.

Positive or social morality means the moral opinions, rules and sentiments actually prevalent among a people or in a society. They are more accurately called morals. Ideal morality means the ethical principles and goals of moral conduct. By morality here we mean positive morality or simply morals. Obviously, law cannot be compared with ideal morality because it is not a social fact. Ideal morality exists in books and not in deeds and acts as morals do.

Difference

Law and Morality differ in their content, sanction, universality and definiteness.

Content

The province of morality, if it is to remain so, consists in the freedom of the individual to think and act as he himself judges to be right or good. Law deals only with the external acts and behaviour of the individual. Even among the external acts, it deals with only those which can be regulated by the eternal authority. There are many acts and several kinds of behaviour which are morally bad but cannot be legally punished.”42 Meanness, ingratitude, jealousy and lying are morally bad, but cannot be legally punished, unless they do not lead to such acts which are legally forbidden. A man may be a great liar, but law will punish him only when he tells a lie in a law suit before the court, or publishes a lie as a libel in a newspaper. Anger is morally bad. But law will punish a hot-tempered person only when he actually injures the life or limb of another person with whom he is angry.

Sanction

Moral rules are enforced by the conscience of the individual or by the opinion of the people. Law, on the other hand, is enforced by the coercive authority of the State. Law is a matter of force while morality is a matter of conscience. Laws of the State are in the nature of ‘must’, while moral laws are in the form of ‘ought’. Moreover, law is based on expediency. It punishes certain actions not because they are immoral but because it is expedient to punish them. Such acts are morally indifferent. They are neither good nor bad, but are punished by law because it is socially expedient or necessary to do so. For example, it is morally immaterial whether we drive a vehicle on the left or right side of the road.

Law is one thing and morality is another. The one is concerned with the external rules which direct men’s actions in an ordered community: the other with the rules and the ideals which lie behind order”. Ernst Barker. Greek Political Theory, p. 206.

But it is illegal to drive on the right side, if law has laid down the “Keep left” rule. Social convenience and not moral wrong requires that this rule must be observed by the citizens. Furthermore, a law remains a law, whether we consider it immoral or not. The law breaker is punished, even if he pleads that he violated it because he regards it immoral. Here is a clash between legal command and moral conscience, which do not coincide in this case. In such cases, most people obey the law and disregard morality, but a few may not and get court punishment. But such cases also show that law and morality cannot remain separate and divergent for long. Universality.

Law is universal in character. It is applied to all persons. Morality is individual in nature and differs from person to person. What I regard as morally good may not be so in the opinion of another person. That is the reason why moral conduct and opinion differ from individual to individual. The causes of this difference are customs, social environment, education, experience and training. But law cannot be differently applied. All must obey it, no matter what their individual differences are. Really, morality develops by difference or indifference of individual opinion, but law can exist only by universality and uniformity of observance.

Definiteness

As law is universal, it is also definite, precise and certain. Morality is to some extent vague, uncertain and indefinite, because it depends on individual conscience, taste, training, etc. That is also the reason why morality changes.

What is moral today may not be considered so tomorrow; or what is moral in the eyes of some persons, may not be so in the eyes of others. For instance, some persons regard monogamy morally good, but others condemn it. But if a law is passed enjoining monogamous marriages in a country, all citizens will have to obey it even those who condemned it. Law is definite because it is compulsive.

 

  • Add Your Comment

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.