TOWARDS A PHILOSOPHY OF LAW

TOWARDS A PHILOSOPHY OF LAW
©Chippy's Dad

What Is Law? Much confusion surrounds the term "law". As commonly used, it refers to at least four separate concepts including the law of God, scientific law, moral law, and legislation. The concepts represented by the first three expressions of law precede the actions of men; these laws are not man-made. Legislation is man-made.

Divine law, scientific law, and moral law constitute human being's attempts to understand and articulate the reality of creation: the universe in which people live. They represent truth to the human capacity for understanding. To the extent of current understanding, these laws never contradict each other. When a contradiction is found, the need for more reflection on the milieu of human existence is indicated. After finding a firm ground upon which to stand, individuals acting alone or in community can hypothesize and test revised understandings. Whatever these understandings, the basic reality remains unchanged and completely in operation.

DIVINE LAW is expressed in the writings, creeds, authorities, and sacraments of the gathering: mosque, synagogue, church. The content of divine law relates to the relationship between mankind and God. Divine law is different from other law because it represents the intentionality of God as far as humans can understand it. All religious expressions contain some version of two laws which precede the actions of people:

HONOR THE LIFE AND PROPERTY OF OTHER PEOPLE.

ABIDE BY YOUR COMMITMENTS.

SCIENTIFIC LAW is expressed in various scientific theories. The content relates to observed natural relationships. An example of scientific law is the law of supply and demand as described by students of economics. Scientific law is different from divine law and legislation because it does not represent intentionality. For example the law of supply and demand is not intended to achieve any purpose other than to explain our observations of economic activity and results. It is not used as an attempt to create a level playing field nor make a group of people wealthier. It merely explains how the world works.

Another scientific law is the second law of thermal dynamics which is not intended to achieve a particular state of affairs but explains that entropy increases. In short all things rundown or wear out.

Leaders in government attempt to achieve certain economic results; but if in so doing, they disregard the scientific law of supply and demand, the results will be disappointing at best. In a like manner many people have denied the second law of thermal dynamics and have wasted much time and resources trying to develop a perpetual motion machine through which energy can be extracted from the machine without putting energy into the machine. Indeed, the concept of the government spending our way into prosperity is an example of a perpetual motion machine. Supposedly, we can extract resources from the economy without first putting energy into the economy.

MORAL LAW is expressed in moral philosophical investigations. The content relates to the civil relations between humans. A central precept of moral law is the categorical imperative, which has been stated in many ways:

1. "Love your neighbor as yourself." –Jesus

2. "So act that you can will that the maxim of your action to be a universal law." –Kant

3. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." –Jefferson

Like scientific law, moral law does not represent intentionality. Moral law consists of a-priori statements of mandates to explain the nature of relations between people and which precede any human intentions.

An example of moral law is the prohibition against stealing. The prohibition is implied by the first law listed above. Failure to abide by the prohibition against stealing results in a loss to the community of all humans. It results in a larger loss than the loss to the victim of theft.

Once upon a time, in Memphis, I observed the attempted theft of an auto battery. In what was probably not the wisest move, I came up and stood beside the would-be thief without him noticing my presence and quietly asked what was wrong with his car. (It happened that I knew both the thief and the owner of the car.) He was completely surprised and immediately stood up straight, looked at me with extreme fear written on his face, and ran away. I closed the hood and reported the situation to the owner. It is probably a vain hope, but I do hope it put such fear in the thief that he never stole again.

The point of the story is to imagine what would have happened had he stolen the battery. The thief would have sold the battery for a buck or two. The battery would then have been resold for some price less than the price of a new battery. Meanwhile, the owner of the car would have been denied the use of her car. As it was, the battery was disconnected and she had to have a friend reconnect it. She would have had to take the time to figure out why her car would not start, call the police to report the theft, go to a battery store, buy a replacement battery, and have it installed. The costs across the entire community in time and effort would have been several hundred dollars expended in order that the thief could have gained maybe two dollars. Time and effort would have been wasted trying to restore a previous situation as opposed to advancing to an improved situation. The largest loss in the preceding example is the loss of trust. People find it necessary to lock doors, install antitheft devices, and hire security guards.

The same applies to taxes. The government receives its money. In order for that to happen, it must employ a hoard of tax collectors. People must employ highly trained experts to decipher the byzantine tax code. People must invest their savings in less than ideal (but government favored) ventures in order to maximize their after tax savings. The loss to the community in time and resources far exceeds the resources available for government expenditures. The biggest loss to the community as a whole is the loss confidence. Everyone lives in fear because no one can be sure that they can avoid an audit by a harassing bureaucrat, be found in "violation" of some obscure provision, and fined or imprisoned.

The moral law prohibiting theft precedes action by mankind and reflects the reality that healthy relationships among people suffer whenever the principle is violated.

All of the preceding forms of law are operational at all times and do not in any way require enforcement. Violations of them always produce unpleasant, and usually immediate, results.

LEGISLATION is expressed in the acts of governments. I try to reserve the term "law" to the above three expressions of law. References to legislation should avoid the term "law". Law precedes the action of people; legislation does not. The distinction between law and legislation implies that legislation can and frequently does contradict expressions of law.

For example in Germany of the 1930's and early 1940's it was illegal and a capital offence to harbor people of the Jewish faith. This legislation contradicts both divine and moral law. The losses to the community of people in Germany and throughout the world were beyond calculation. Germany for a short period reverted to the stone-age. Never-the-less, the policy of harassing Jews was exceedingly popular just as harassing undocumented immigrants is today.

In the same way it is supposedly "illegal" in the United States to harbor or employ undocumented aliens. Clearly this legislation is illegal since it contradicts the natural prohibition of encroachment and the unalienable right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Refer to the previous post on this site On Immigration. The cost to the community of humans is incalculable. Those who are so vocal about "illegal" immigrants should consider the cost of deporting in excess of seven million people. Such a mass deportation would create massive hardship and would rank among the largest forced migrations in history. It would exceed the Trail of Tears.

Much legislation is acceptable. For example, the requirement to drive on the right side of the road establishes a convention to enable safe driving. The convention does not violate the Laws. However, most legislation does violate the laws. All legislation that violates the laws will produce unpleasant results. Unpleasant results include injuries, financial chaos, loss of healthy relationships, starvation, poverty, and death.