51
votes
Accepted
Is there a term for the belief that "if it's legal, it's moral"?
We are talking about "Appeal to law" fallacy.
When following the law is assumed to be the morally correct thing to
do, without justification, or when breaking the law is assumed to be
the ...
- 561
37
votes
Accepted
Why are legal and moral responsibilities said to be different?
In the most trivial sense, they are obviously distinct because morality does not disappear when I enter an area with no laws. Similarly, my personal morality does not change as I move between ...
- 465
22
votes
Is there a term for the belief that "if it's legal, it's moral"?
I think what you are looking for is called Legal Interpretivism, which, unlike Legal Positivism (which asserts that laws are distinct from morality), asserts that laws are based on morality, and that ...
- 2,379
20
votes
What is to be understood by the phrase "Israel's right to exist"?
It's referring to the state, not the land or the people, so your example of a pear isn't really applicable. The preamble of the 1988 charter of Hamas (aka "the Islamic Resistance Movement") declares ...
- 301
17
votes
Accepted
Besides state punishment, are there any other reasons why one should not do crimes?
You could start by discouraging other people to do crimes if only because you don't want to be the victim of a criminal act. People around you will probably do the same, and this will establish a ...
- 4,357
17
votes
What are philosophical arguments for the position that Intelligent Design is nothing but "Creationism in disguise"?
Did the court of the law that judged ID to be creationism in disguise employ philosophical arguments to come to that conclusion? ... More generally, are there philosophical arguments for the position ...
- 17.3k
16
votes
Why are legal and moral responsibilities said to be different?
They must be different! Otherwise, there would be no such thing as an unjust law.
I would not want to be there when the person who claims that legal obligation and moral obligation are one and the ...
- 4,030
15
votes
What are philosophical arguments for the position that Intelligent Design is nothing but "Creationism in disguise"?
Reasonnably, you can make a philosophical argument that creationism and intelligent design are close from each other and overlap, or point at the flaws of intelligent design that make it a ...
- 4,357
13
votes
What fallacy dismisses criticism of a bad law with "just don't break it"?
The form of the reasoning is this:
Thesis: Punishing X in this way is wrong
Rebuttal: Don't do X and you won't be punished
On the surface, this is ignoratio elenchi (ignorance of refutation), a.k.a....
- 42k
11
votes
Innocent until proven guilty - why?
The presumption of innocence in law serves the same purpose as the null hypothesis in science. The purpose is to produce an accurate outcome in relation to the facts at hand and the seriousness of the ...
- 5,784
11
votes
What is to be understood by the phrase "Israel's right to exist"?
The reason Israel demands that the Palestinians recognize Israel's so-called "right to exist" is that in so doing, they would officially relinquish any and all claims they have on the land they owned ...
- 6,470
11
votes
Besides state punishment, are there any other reasons why one should not do crimes?
Revenge!
This can be mathematically modelled. What is the optimum strategy for a society with complete libertarian freedom, i.e. no central authority? (Actually, it was single-celled organisms, but ...
- 241
9
votes
Besides state punishment, are there any other reasons why one should not do crimes?
This is related to the more general concept of social contracts, states, power hierarchies, and such. There have been several philosophers who have thought a lot about this. A good starting point ...
- 1,584
8
votes
Why are legal and moral responsibilities said to be different?
Legal and moral responsibilities are subtly different, even if we presume an entirely just legal system.
Legal responsibilities are about the scope of a person's authority. It is illegal for me to ...
- 1,916
8
votes
What is to be understood by the phrase "Israel's right to exist"?
Wikipedia provides a brief history of the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181:
Following World War II and the establishment of the United Nations, the General Assembly resolved that a ...
- 19.1k
8
votes
Can non-agents be moral or immoral?
Children are not denied moral agency, they are usually denied legal culpability. That's a big difference. Children as agents can be engaged in ethics and are ethical beings, but they are often ...
- 17.3k
8
votes
What are philosophical arguments for the position that Intelligent Design is nothing but "Creationism in disguise"?
In my view, this question is largely equivocation between a philosophical position that could be called "Intelligent Design" and the fake position advocated in the real world called "...
- 347
7
votes
Accepted
Who was first to say that justice is "to give each his due"?
This is an English translation of the Latin motto suum cuique, alternatively translated as "to each their own" or "may all get their due". The phrase was popularized by Cicero in ...
- 42k
6
votes
Accepted
Is there a demarcation problem for religions?
Humans love to categorise things, and we may think of categories as dividing things up with borders between the categories. But that isn't actually how we normally do conceptualise our categories - ...
- 1,753
6
votes
Can non-agents be moral or immoral?
Since all morals are relative, the answer depends on the values of the culture in which the wrongdoer is being judged. In some societies a child who murders another, say, might be considered not to ...
- 7,368
5
votes
Can any consensual activity be wrong?
There are philosophical frameworks in which "consensual" activity is still illicit. Consider these two examples:
Under the umbrella of deontology, there are a couple different groups that say (for ...
- 5,939
5
votes
What philosophers argued that human rights can be forfeited?
You posit that the culpable actions of an individual make the individual forfeit her basic rights. You ask what would be the name of the moral principle equivalent to your posit. The harm principle ...
- 3,647
5
votes
What philosophers argued that human rights can be forfeited?
Locke, to whom the doctrine of human rights is often traced, supported the idea that the human rights can be forfeited when a human is "revolting from his own kind to that of Beasts". In other words, ...
- 42k
5
votes
Are speeding tickets ethical?
You have elevated the risk of death and injury unacceptably
Criminal laws exist to keep people from committing actions that society has deemed to be unacceptable. There are plenty of other laws but ...
- 4,879
5
votes
Innocent until proven guilty - why?
▻'INNOCENT UNTIL PROVED GUILTY' - DEFINITION
Under this presumption the accused is to be considered innocent until proven guilty of a criminal offence. This is usually taken to entail that that the ...
- 35.2k
5
votes
Why are legal and moral responsibilities said to be different?
By way of example, under US laws, slavery was legal and Jim Crow laws were legal, and under German law the Holocaust was legal. However, many people today, possibly including yourself, believe that ...
5
votes
Why are legal and moral responsibilities said to be different?
A law is a standard that the government uses force to impose. For example, if you murder somebody the government may use force against you to catch you and keep you confined in prison. If you exceed ...
- 7,227
5
votes
Aside from Jesus who have put justice (legalism) and friendliness (benevolence) in opposition?
There is a discussion to be had here but I am not sure it is best framed in terms of an opposition between justice and friendship.
Jesus' requirement is that human relations should exhibit and be ...
- 35.2k
5
votes
Why is the rule of the law so easily damaged or broken?
The law is enforced by humans. Humans are notorously inefficient. This is why law is so easily broken.
Consider machines implementing a law. Suppose your car's alarm don't stop buzzing if engine is on ...
- 1,015
5
votes
What do atheists (atheistic philosophers) think about the Spirit of Law?
The spirit of the law has nothing to do with ghosts, specters, spirits and other supernatural beings and it's nothing that requires faith, but is usually more about intent, purpose, character, essence ...
- 3,390
Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible