I will be discussing the distinction between natural law, and the law of society, and in this case maritime law. In order to clearly observe the theme of justice I believe the reader should be perceiving the story through Captain Veres eyes; the character that must analyze the laws of both nature and man. What is Natural Law? “Natural law is preexisting and is not created in courts by judges. Philosophers and theologians throughout history have differed in their interpretations of natural law, but in theory, natural law should be the same throughout time and across the world because it is based on human nature, not on culture or customs.” (Investopdia) An innate sense of morality would be the basis of what truly defines natural law.
Hard determinism is the theory that human behaviour and actions are wholly determined by external factors, and therefore humans do not have genuine free will or ethical accountability. There are several different supporting views for this belief. Hard determinism is underpinned by the work of Isaac Newton’s theory of scientific laws which is that we are completely governed by these laws. According to these laws one does not have moral responsibility for their actions as they were predetermined by a ‘higher power’. Hence why, natural laws such as gravity and motion assist in forming the basis for the cause and effect that fills the discussion of hard determinism.
Natural Moral Law is a theory that is explained by Thomas Aquinas and Aristotle. It states that there is a natural order to our world that should be followed. It was originated in the philosophy of Aristotle and then developed by Aquinas. Natural Law is an absolute theory of ethics but it is not rooted in duty but in our human nature and our search for genuine happiness and fulfilment. Aquinas considered that by using our reason to reflect on our human nature we could discover our specific end purpose.
Hayoung Kim (2008190068) Professor Erik Harris Comparative Political Philosophy March 31, 2010 Short Assignment 1: Analysis of Schwitzgebel’s Discussion of “Natural” Schwitzgebel criticizes Hobbes and Rousseau’s thoughts on the natural state of humans since the context is one in which a state or social structure is absent (147). Schwitzgebel claims that humans cannot be analyzed in isolation to social context, thus human “behavior within social structure is their natural behavior” (148). Schwitzgebel then proceeds on the assumed notion that this social structure is a stable one and the environment is normal and healthy. He believes that the key to studying the natural state of humans is in the process of development or growth. To say that a particular trait is ‘natural’ is to say that it has not been subjected to any external influence.
cannot be broken) primary precepts to make moral decisions. One of these primary precepts, “preservation of innocent life”, leads to abortion being forbidden. Natural law observes the sanctity of life thesis, considering an embryo / foetus to be a person. However, although Natural law respects the sanctity of life, it is by no means a religious theory, for it is based on objective truth. Despite Natural Law forbidding abortion, there is a doctrine of double effect that can be implemented.
Finally, I will state which viewpoint I agree with and give my reasons why. Determinism is stated as “the view that every event, including human actions, is brought about by previous events in accordance with universal casual laws that govern the world. Human freedom is an illusion” (Chaffee 141). As the definition bluntly states, people who believe in determinism believe that everything is predetermined based on prior events and people and do not believe that humans have free will. In the philosophical view of determinism with respect to free will, it focuses more on the circumstances surrounding the agent instead of just the individual agent.
Human rights are the fundamental rights that humans have by the fact of being human, and that neither created nor can be abrogated by any government. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights did not just emerge easily from a vacuum and it would be the final declaration aimed at securing certain rights for citizens in nation-states. What the declaration includes is traced back to Magna Carta (1215). Those that came after have emerged as strategic responses to social and political alteration. John Locke, who is often credited as the father of human rights and liberalism, maintained that humans were free and equal, and that the ideal society was based on a social contract between the humans and those who governed.
THE KING CAN DO NO WRONG: SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY 3 The King Can Do No Wrong: Sovereign Immunity The definition of “Sovereign Immunity” is: legal protection that prevents a sovereign state or person from being sued without consent (West’s encyclopedia of American Law, 2008). Sovereign immunity is a judicial doctrine that prevents the government or its political subdivisions, departments, and agencies from being sued without permission. The doctrine stems from the ancient English principle that the monarch can do no wrong (2008). Under the feudal system no lord could be called to answer before a vassal, and given that the king was the highest lord in the realm, it was not possible to order him to answer to any tribunal. Of course, we have no king and the government is not the sovereign.
Cultural relativism is a valid moral theory because there are no universal moral truths. Critically Discuss. Cultural Relativism theory takes the position that no objective truth or values can exist for these are distinctive to each society and culture (D’Olimpio, 2013). William Graham Sumner argues that that there are no universal truths in ethics; all ethical norms are relative to cultures (Sommers, 2001). I will now present my argument that cultural relativism is not a valid moral theory.
Free Will – Neuroscience of the mind Do Libet-style experiments show that we do not have any kind of freewill? Free will is the ability to have full authority in the decisions we make without any external restrictions and that human lives are not predetermined by fate, deities or necessity . Philosophers and thinkers have been exploring the existence and extent of free will for a very long time. It started with arguments on Greek mythology like “Odysseus”, whether the gods allow humans to choose. Today it has become more of a psychological problem that is affected by causes in natural phenomena .