Deep Dish said:
Ethics, in contrast to morality which is relativistic, are universal and based upon logic and reasoning. Drinking alcohol can be rightfully considered immoral but it certainly is not unethical on its own merits, unless the ethics of the circumstances supercede. Ethics are the pillar foundation of society and in much the same regard the rule of law is what binds society together. United we stand but divided we fall. Laws are a hybrid mixture between ethics and morality; the logic and reasoning of ethics combined with the relativism of morality. Rather than the universality of ethics and relativism of morality, laws are a compromise for all between many.
I would have to disagree. There are many ethics which are based on oughts and ideas instead of logic and reasoning. Divine command theory for example is much less about what comes from rationality but what is declared by God. Although there are cornucopias of examples one could use to show this, the point stands. Neither are they always circumstantial nor the pillars of society.
Law and morality is a very interesting combination. On one side you have lex naturalis (natural law) with Hobbes, Locke, etc. Dworkin believes morality is closely tied to the law -- by necessary connection. Then on the other hand you have thinkers like H.L.A. Hart where there is no necessary connection between law and morality.
Ethics is not necessarily universal unless you are a universalist and then it is universal qua inter-subjectivity. Sure there are theories such as Kant's Deontological view that give rigid duties and morality based around an imperative but there is also Ethical Relativism, and countless other theories on both sides of the equation. Although some of them may be more plausible than others none of them are proven correct. That is not to say I think Plato's Republic is a viable choice but most theories can be argued for in a logical fashion.
Jurisprudence is a complicated philosophy if only for the number of possible theories and how they come into practice. Morality and law have a very different relationship in Bentham's Utilitarianism than they would for a Postmodern structuralist.
Ronald Dworkin (not be be confused with
this feminist) and
Hart are very good to look at if you're writing an essay because one believes in the necessary connection of laws and morality while the other does not. John Austin is insightful too for positive law if you're using Hart. Other topics that might help are Hobbes' negative freedom (chapter XIV Leviathan) and Charles Taylor's "What's Wrong with Negative Liberty" where he discusses the positive aspect of it. It is quite the ancillary for a law and morality study.
If you're in a 300+ class might be to look at Hegel's commentary on Kantian dualism. If you figure out exactly what you want to write about and for what class (you have quite a broad category there and I am not sure what type of course you are doing) I can suggest some material you could use.
Glad you're educating yourself about the society you live in. I'm a law student so feel free to ask anything.
