Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Societal Morality: Devlin and Dworkin Compared. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 3 page paper compares and contrasts the ideas of these two thinkers. The subject of law and morality is discussed. The primary focus is on whether or not morality can be legislated. Bibliography lists 3 sources.
Page Count:
3 pages (~225 words per page)
File: RT13_SA310lw.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
part. And while these issues are paramount today, morality as it respects the law has always been a controversial subject. In his critique of Lord Devlins position that criminal
law should be drawn from public morality, Ronald Dworkin writes that what is shocking and wrong is not his idea that the communitys morality counts, but his idea of what
counts as communitys morality (Dyzenhaus & Ripstein, 2001). In other words, according to Devlin, morality is more aligned with the will of the people and what they decide as opposed
to contemplating a scenario based on moral principles. With Devlins position, intrinsic morality is thrown out in favor of a position of utility. The utilitarian view that the quantity
of happiness, or majority rules, is rather obvious. Devlin bases his view on the idea that a shared morality, or a morality of a society, is a necessity. One
would think that he would agree with the idea of cultural relatively. Indeed, morality is a social construction and not something that emanates from the soul or from God. Dworkins
ideas are quite different but there are some threads of similarity. Dworkins objections do not appear to be based necessarily on the way in which the ideas are created but
rather because there is a lack of autonomy. He does not view morality as something that is embraced by a group, but rather as something that is individualistic. One may
equate Dworkins ideas with libertarianism. Individuals come to their own conclusions about morality and this is largely intrinsic, but also cerebral. However, they reach their conclusion, they should be allowed
to act as they see fit as long as it does not harm others. In society today, this principal is primarily followed in free nations except there is still often
...