law vs morality essay

The Relation Between Law and Morality

Introduction, works cited.

The connection between the law and morality is rather controversial as, on the one hand, morality must be separated from law and on the other hand, morality is an inherent part of the law.

The problem of law and morality is rather difficult, as many believe that there are no explicit distinctions between them. There are cases when morals coincide with true legal laws since humans created them. The human reason here could subconsciously shape the morality of law. However, the existence of unjust laws proves that morality and ethics are not similar. Therefore, the connection between the law and morality is rather controversial as, on the one hand, morality must be separated from law and on the other hand, morality is an inherent part of the law. In that regard, the film Trial (1963) is the confrontation of the natural laws based on morality and the juridical laws. In addition, the film also shows how the city creates its vision of the law system.

Law and morality must be separated as legal and moral standards are from being identical.

There is an assumption that law must be separated from morality due to the fact that legal and moral standards could not be identified. Closer attention to these issues was given from the angle of legal positivism. In his article, Hart expresses his radical view on the notion of legality based on social factors but on its positive outcomes. The author insists on the fact that law is neutrally colored; it could not be referred as to something bad or good. Considering this, Hart mentions that, “to enable men to see steadily the precise issues posed by the existence of morally bad laws and to understand the specific character of the authority of a legal order” (Hart 63). The Harts premises are based on the historical background and his referring to Austin whose theory of sovereignty. However, he rejects his idea of law based on the threat of punishment as it already includes the moral aspect. The theory of legal positivism implies that in the eighteenth-century people regard the law as separate from morality.

Hart also argues that the necessity to separate the law from morality is based on the presumption that morality could negatively influence legal standards. The fact is that the notion of morality varies depending on the mentality and culture of individuals. Then the law is the universal notion that comprises a limited number of moral aspects. That is why, the legal deviations are inadmissible since could be reduced to the subjective trial, as depicted in the Welles film under the same name. Hence, the main hero of the novel Joseph K. was taken under open arrest where he was forced to recognize the crime he did not commit. The film shows what consequences could be revealed under the impact of morality under the law and vice versa. The film also represents the corrupt system of law, which is unfair and ineffective. Joseph becomes the victim of demoralized law where the trial justice is handled by the human factors. Considering the film from Hart’s point of view, it teaches that the law should and must be separated from morality. Hart admits certain moral rights to be inserted into the legal system. However, natural laws must be excluded from the process of the creation of the law, as they may have negative outcomes for society.

Further, the movie contradicts Harts’s vision on the faithfulness of the law as it reveals the idea that law should also function as a means of moral satisfaction. The trial is a justice aimed at satisfying moral issues. Hart states, “Whether every particular rule of law must satisfy a moral minimum in order to be a law, but whether a system of rules which altogether failed to do this could be a legal system” (Hart 65). In this respect, careful consideration must have the command theory of law that reveals the falsity of separation of law from morality. To explain such a contradiction, Hart divides the laws of primary and secondary obligations. The theory discloses that there are cases that refuse the logical approach but are based on social aims, which are different in certain societies. Therefore, the law directly depends on society and its peculiarities (Hart 70). In contrast, the problem of morality and law arises when the cases are resolved without consideration of social situation but simply based on rational thinking.

However, Hart in his article considers that if a law violates moral issues it could not be regarded as the standard law. The same is observed in the movie when the main hero is trialed according to the specific laws based on the morals of the citizen but not on the universally acknowledged legal norms. Relying on this, Hart constitutes, “It could not follow from the mere fact that a rule violated standards of morality that it was not a rule of law; and conversely, it could not follow from the mere fact that a rule was desirable that it was a rule of law” (Hart, 64). Consequently, the city with his own vision on “law” contains his own vision of morals that considerably deviates the conventional views on ethics and human morale. The main protagonist could not accept the new surrealistic world where he is forced to obey the newly established rules. In the world of the imaginary rules he is accused of an unspecified crime; he is also arrested but not taken in custody. Anyway, this point of view shows the negative influence of morals on the law; at the same time, morality, in its good sense, is an inherent part of the law serving the ground of the legal concepts. In other words, the film proves that law is unlikely to be separated from morals on the mere ground that they were created by humans.

Law is considered as integrity as it identifies moral constraints and political morality.

There is an opposite view, where the law is considered as integrity because it identifies the moral constraints and on political issues. In the article Morality of Law, Lon Fuller expresses his own alternative view on the morale within the legal system. According to his article, Fuller represents two types of the morality of duty and morality of aspiration. According to this, “morality of aspiration starts at the top of human achievement, the morality of duty starts at the bottom” (Fuller 5). The former enlarges on the fidelity to the law that coincides with the adherence to positive rules. Fuller rejects Hart’s ideas about the law principle of adjudication where the law is fully subjected to the state. Considering this, Fuller presents “the internal morality of law” that serves to create just laws pertaining to society. Fuller’s idea of inner morality is rather controversial, as it does not the moral norms as something negative, like in the movie Trial.

Thus, the characters of the film create their own moral system that allows them to interrogate the accused Joseph K. during daily routine. Anyway, the film shows internal morality here is based on corrupt morality that converts the legal system into the distorted juridical mechanism infected by morals. Throughout the movie, where Joseph’s life is a mere trial, the leading character is constantly trying to justify himself in front of the trial for the crime he did not accomplish. His strange feeling of guilt proves Fuller’s theory of internal morality and fidelity to the law. Fuller identifies eight features that make the law fail. In that particular film, the law is distorted due to making the rules that contradict each other (Fuller 33). By this, the author expresses the idea of the availability of law. Hence, the inspectors and a useless advocate serve as the guardians of law that are directed against the good principles of morale. The film shows that morality can destroy the adequacy of law thus supporting Fuller’s idea that the law originates from the moral norms of a particular society.

Due to the fact that morality constitutes the law, there must be corresponding constraints. According to Fuller, the neutrality of internal morality identifies the objectivity of law. In other words, the researcher addresses the legal norms from the retrospective of “morality that makes law possible”. Therefore, only morality of duty but not aspiration must be applied to the legal issues. Here, the Trial is bright evidence of inappropriate legal issues that are based on moral desires but not on obligation. To support the idea, Fuller writes “as a citizen or as an official, [a man] might be found wanting. But in such a case he was condemned for failure, not for being recreant for duty; for the shortcoming, not for wrongdoing” (Fuller 5). The movie manifests that Fuller’s concept of the morality of duty as the basic rules for a full-fledged and just society without which, it would turn out to be a mess. The thrust of the trial lies in the fact that Joseph’s morality of aspiration does not coincide with the social norms.

It is worth saying that Fuller associates inner morality with the morality of the Old Testament and the Ten Commandments (Fuller 6). The above mentions the humans’ obligations to live according to social norms. Fuller shows that morality constitutes a person’s affiliation to a certain society and his/her determination as to the refuge of the community. One could not but mention the connection of God as the creator of law. The movie reveals the impossibility to enter the reign of God, as a man is not worth being equal with God. To put in other words, it is God that could punish and justify whereas a man has to obey. Here, we could observe that God defines the inner morality of each person abused by the government.

In conclusion, the opposed theories of Hart and Fuller reveal several dimensions of the film. From Hart’s point of view, the film Trial teaches why the law should be separated from the law; it also manifests a rigid distinction between moral and legal standards. By means of Fuller’s theory, it is possible to highlight the ground of the trial and Joseph’s uncertain accusation. The theory of two morality uncovers the points of the corrupt legal system of the city is motivated by the morality of aspiration but not the morality of duty. Anyway, both Fuller and Hart do not fully exclude morality from the law because the law is an obligation but not a desire.

Fuller, Lon. L. Morality of Law. US: Yale University Press, 1969.

Hart, Herbert, “Positivism and the Seperation of Law and Morals”. The Concept of Law, 1961.

The Trial, 1963, Orson Welles, Anthony Perkins. DVD.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2022, March 11). The Relation Between Law and Morality. https://studycorgi.com/the-relation-between-law-and-morality/

"The Relation Between Law and Morality." StudyCorgi , 11 Mar. 2022, studycorgi.com/the-relation-between-law-and-morality/.

StudyCorgi . (2022) 'The Relation Between Law and Morality'. 11 March.

1. StudyCorgi . "The Relation Between Law and Morality." March 11, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/the-relation-between-law-and-morality/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "The Relation Between Law and Morality." March 11, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/the-relation-between-law-and-morality/.

StudyCorgi . 2022. "The Relation Between Law and Morality." March 11, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/the-relation-between-law-and-morality/.

This paper, “The Relation Between Law and Morality”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: May 26, 2022 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

The Morality and Law Relationship Essay

Introduction.

Moral principles are the backbone of society. In the process of establishing rules and hierarchies to follow, people have chosen certain principles and beliefs that are beneficial to them as a group. Common taboos such as killing or stealing are understood as detrimental to social life, creating an incentive to prevent people from committing them. Similarly, nations create and uphold laws in order to reach specific goals or prevent unwanted outcomes. There is a direct link between what society understands as valuable, morally and ethically, and legislation. With the evolution of human thought, the law changed accordingly, following certain precedents or exchanging them for newer ones.

While it is impossible for established law to account for any moral dilemma, the commonly understood boundaries of right and wrong can often be supported by existing legislation. This paper is concerned with discussing and showcasing the direct link between moral issues and legality. Using examples from the past, including case law and historical events, it will be possible to approach this subject. In particular, topics of international workers’ rights and racial segregation will be broached, as their legal status has shifted along with the people’s moral values.

Changes in Law Created by Moral Concerns

Worker rights.

Throughout history, work has always been a part of people’s lives. An activity directed at securing a living, creating certain outcomes that are necessary for human prosperity. With the transition from feudal to capital societies, work became vital in producing goods and services. Without labor, it is impossible to support the economy, maintain a capitalist framework and fulfill the needs of consumers. Workers as a central force in promoting the necessary outcomes for society as a whole. Due to the existence of a profit motive, and a lack of regulation in early capitalism, emerging factories rarely had workplace regulations or protections for their laborers. For many, this resulted in trauma, injury, and death in the workplace. People were overworked in unsafe conditions for meager pay, forced into the production cycle that regarded them as simple cogs in the machine.

The mistreatment of workers contributed to the emergence of worker’s rights organizations, which argued against unethical and immoral workplace treatment of employees. Different nations have had their own distinct relationships with the concept of workplace advocacy, depending on their history or leadership. However, the vast majority of nations have been able to enact labor laws in a certain capacity. Social movements, protests, sit-ins and active participation of workers all across the world were effective in highlighting the moral reprehensibility of contemporary professional practices 1 . Most worker’s rights organizations found the existing lack of protections or considerations for the working class intolerable and focused on helping the common people. They argued that individuals have to be treated with dignity and fairness, considering their worth and individual humans and their needs. This is especially true of considerations such as child labor, unreasonably long work hours, or a lack of days off 2 . In the US, a combination of factory owner neglect and a desire to maximize profits drove factories to ignore the moral and ethical concerns of their workers. The Fair Labor Standards Act, introduced in 1938, established regulations for acceptable work hours, pay, and days off and fully prohibited child labor (Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938). The incessant work of activists and worker’s interest groups has forced changes in the government, which recognized the unethical nature of harsh business practices. Other nations were similarly capable of negotiating fairer labor standards. In France, the Matignon Agreements of 1936 established a regulated work week, labor protections and minimum wage 3 . For UK workers, the 1998 National Minimum Wage Act was a notable legislative change, giving all employees more livable and secure wages 4 . The collective work of governments and their people was able to make labor practices align better with the social and moral standards of today’s age.

Segregation and Massive Resistance in the US

Segregation is another major consideration for the United States of America, one connected with its storied legacy of slavery. Even after slaves were legally freed, black people were largely unable to enjoy the same rights and capabilities as their white counterparts. Local governments, businesses and various entities worked to dictate where the black population could live, study, and even eat. Certain states used their authority to force the newly freed slaves into a system of suppression and exploitation. In the state of Virginia, for example, the local constitution of the time focused heavily on reinforcing the principles of white supremacy and black subjugation 5 . In particular, black people were largely excluded from voting, disallowing them from shaping the future of their community. Similarly, all-black schools received limited funding, and African-Americans were often forced to live in poorer areas 6 . The combination of existing law and a lack of protection contributed to a systematic disparity between the black and white populations.

Despite established laws and protections against segregation existing in the US Constitution, states were able to exercise their own authority in order to reinforce certain outcomes. However, considerable public pushback could also be felt, both from the legal and ethical side of the issue. With the precedent set by the Brown v. Board of Education case, other courts and public figures argued on the unconstitutional nature of segregation 7 . Public figures in newspapers, such as Lenoir Chambers of The Virginian-Pilot, worked tirelessly to convince the public about the immoral nature of segregation 8 . The efforts of black activist groups, good-faith politicians and courts have laid a path forward to fighting the remains of segregation in the US. This has resulted in other precedent court cases, such as the one discussed in Harrison’s contemporary article 9 . The writing talks about the Court for the Eastern District of Virginia’s decision to rule desegregation as unconstitutional, which signaled a major shift in legal and public opinion within Virginia. The existence of an active conversation has helped the courts to take matters to the legal level and support vulnerable individuals.

The examination of these two subjects has presented an important connection between legislation, people’s rights and morality. In the course of history, people that cared about the lives and health of others wanted to see positive change which reflected the value of human life have prompted changes in legislation. Considerations of ethics and morality of people’s treatment coincided with the need to protect certain groups, allowing the law to change. Workers demanded to be treated with dignity and understanding that was warranted by their importance, prompting the government to introduce better labor standards. Similarly, activists and public media figures fought against segregation and opposed attempts at re-introducing it in society. Their concerns and passion, often focused on the well-being and security of others, were rooted in what they understood as right for society. People who want to see their community better reflect individual-centered moral considerations are largely responsible for shaping today’s legislation.

Reference List

Crawford, Jason. “How Factories Were Made Safe.” The Roots of Progress .

Daugherity, Brian. “Desegregation in Public Schools.” Encyclopedia Virginia .

Harrison, Joseph. “Virginia’s ‘Massive Resistance’ Laws Declared Unconstitutional.” The Journal of Negro Education 28, no. 2 (1959): 163.

Hayter, Susan, and International Labour Office. The Role of Collective Bargaining in the Global Economy : Negotiating for Social Justice . Cheltenham, Uk ; Northampton, Ma: Edward Elgar ; Geneva, Switzerland, 2011.

Lebowitz, Shana. “Here’s How the 40-Hour Workweek Became the Standard in America – Business Insider.” Business Insider . Business Insider, 2015.

Leidholdt, Alex. Standing before the Shouting Mob Lenoir Chambers and Virginia’s Massive Resistance to Public School Integration. Univ Of Alabama Pr, 2007.

Queen Mary University of London. “A Short History of the Living Wage in the UK.” Www.qmul.ac.uk .

Ralph Clipman Mcdanel. The Virginia Constitutional Convention of 1901-1902 . Holmes Beach, Fl: Gaunt, 1999.

Appendix 1 – Case Law

• Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka [1954] 347 U.S. 483 (U.S. Supreme Court).

Appendix 2 – Legislation

Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 [Online]. U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division.

• Shana Lebowitz, “Here’s How the 40-Hour Workweek Became the Standard in America – Business Insider,” Business Insider (Business Insider, 2015). Web.
• Jason Crawford, “How Factories Were Made Safe,” The Roots of Progress. Web.
• Susan Hayter and International Labour Office, The Role of Collective Bargaining in the Global Economy : Negotiating for Social Justice (Cheltenham, Uk ; Northampton, Ma: Edward Elgar ; Geneva, Switzerland, 2011).
• Queen Mary University of London, “A Short History of the Living Wage in the UK,” Www.qmul.ac.uk. Web.
• Ralph Clipman Mcdanel, The Virginia Constitutional Convention of 1901-1902 (Holmes Beach, Fl: Gaunt, 1999).
• Brian Daugherity, “Desegregation in Public Schools,” Encyclopedia Virginia. Web.
• Alex Leidholdt, Standing before the Shouting Mob Lenoir Chambers and Virginia’s Massive Resistance to Public School Integration. (Univ Of Alabama Pr, 2007).
• Joseph Harrison, “Virginia’s ‘Massive Resistance’ Laws Declared Unconstitutional,” The Journal of Negro Education 28, no. 2 (1959): 163.
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, June 19). The Morality and Law Relationship. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-morality-and-law-relationship/

"The Morality and Law Relationship." IvyPanda , 19 June 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/the-morality-and-law-relationship/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'The Morality and Law Relationship'. 19 June.

IvyPanda . 2023. "The Morality and Law Relationship." June 19, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-morality-and-law-relationship/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Morality and Law Relationship." June 19, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-morality-and-law-relationship/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Morality and Law Relationship." June 19, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-morality-and-law-relationship/.

• Protections Against Employment Discrimination
• The Bill of Rights and the Florida Constitution
• Virginia Woolf's Life and Works
• Thurgood Marshall: Supreme Court of the United States
• Defense of Marriage Act
• Business Law & Court System in Virginia
• Criminal Procedure Policy
• Differences in Taxation Between Florida and Virginia State
• Nature of Crime in the State of Virginia
• Lawyers' Professional Responsibility and Regulation
• Bribery in the Pirates of Penzance Company
• Ethics of Racial Profiling in the United States
• Law and Morality Separation and Relationship
• Food Lion, Inc. v. ABC, Inc.- 194 F.3d 505
• Aspects of Ethics in Policing

Law and Morality

Cite this chapter.

• Ch. Perelman 7 &
• Harold J. Berman 8  

Part of the book series: Synthese Library ((SYLI,volume 142))

222 Accesses

Traditionally, studies dedicated to the relations between law and morality insisted, from a Kantian orientation, upon the following distinctions: law governs external behavior, morality emphasizes intention, law establishes a correlation between rights and obligations, morality prescribes duties which do not bring forth subjective rights; law establishes obligations sanctioned by power, morality escapes organized sanctions.

Presented at the XIVth International Congress of Philosophy, Vienna, Sept. 1968, Proceedings , Vienna, 1970, vol. V, pp. 153–158.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview.  Download preview PDF.

See Chapter 3 p. 41 of the present volume.

Google Scholar  

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Centre de Philosophie du Droit, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium

Ch. Perelman

Harvard University, USA

Harold J. Berman ( Ames Professor of Law )

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1980 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland

About this chapter

Perelman, C., Berman, H.J. (1980). Law and Morality. In: Justice, Law, and Argument. Synthese Library, vol 142. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9010-4_12

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9010-4_12

Publisher Name : Springer, Dordrecht

Print ISBN : 978-90-277-1090-1

Online ISBN : 978-94-009-9010-4

eBook Packages : Springer Book Archive

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Find Study Materials for

• Business Studies
• Combined Science
• Computer Science
• Engineering
• English Literature
• Environmental Science
• Human Geography
• Macroeconomics
• Microeconomics
• Social Studies
• Browse all subjects
• Read our Magazine

Create Study Materials

Delve into the fascinating relationship between law and morality, as we examine the key concepts and their significance in society. This article will guide you through the essential definitions and distinctions, while also exploring how the two intersect within the UK legal system . Understand the integral role law and morality play in historical and contemporary cases, and discover the differences that set them apart. Prepare yourself for a compelling exploration of these fundamental concepts that shape the very fabric of our society. Welcome to the world of law and morality.

Explore our app and discover over 50 million learning materials for free.

• Law and Morality
• Explanations
• StudySmarter AI
• Textbook Solutions
• Business Law
• Contract Law
• European Law
• Human Rights Law
• International And Humanitarian Law
• UK Criminal Law
• Abuse Control
• Access to Justice
• Acquisition of ownership
• Acquisition of property
• Administrative Law
• Advertising Law
• Articles of Association
• BGB company
• Bankruptcy Law
• Bar Standards Board
• Capital Increase
• Capital Market Law
• Capital Reduction
• Charity Law
• Child custody
• Child custody law
• Child maintenance
• Claim of Lien
• Commercial Agency Law
• Commercial Law
• Commercial Practices
• Commercial Purchase
• Commercial Register
• Commercial Transactions
• Commission Business
• Company Law
• Comparative Advertising
• Competing Interests
• Competition Law
• Constitutional Doctrine
• Constitutional Law UK
• Construction Law
• Contested paternity
• Cooperative Society
• Corporate Law
• Corporate Reorganization
• Corporate Succession
• Court of appeal
• Credit Agreement Law
• Crown Prosecution Service
• Current Account
• Customary Law
• Data protection and AI
• Delegated Legislation
• Devolution In UK Law
• Doctrine of Precedent
• E Commerce Law
• Enforceable Rights
• Enforced Rules
• English Law
• Environmental Law
• European Company
• Fair Trading Law
• Finance Law
• Freedom Of Information
• Freight Business
• General Banking Law
• General Partnership
• Heritable building rights
• Housing Law
• Immigration Law
• Implied Repeal
• Industrial Property Law
• Insurance Law
• Intellectual Law
• International data transfers
• Judicial Appointments UK
• Judicial Independence
• Land charge
• Landmark Legal Cases
• Law and Justice
• Law and Society
• Law vs Morality
• Legal Aid Uk
• Legal Ombudsman
• Legal Personnel
• Legal Principles
• Legal Rules
• Legal Services Act
• Legal System
• Legal advice
• Legal and general funds
• Legislation
• Liens on real property
• Limited Partnership
• Loss of ownership
• Loss of possession
• Magistrates' Courts
• Maintenance claims
• Maintenance law
• Martial Law
• Matrimonial property law
• Merger Control
• Misleading Advertising
• Moral Diversity
• Moral Values
• Non-marital cohabitation
• Northern Irish Law
• Obiter Dictum
• Online data protection
• Parentage law
• Parental Custody
• Partnership Company
• Partnership Limited by Shares
• Partnerships
• Primary Legislation
• Prior notice
• Private Interest
• Procuration
• Prohibition of Cartels
• Property Law
• Public Interest
• Public Limited Company
• Public interest disclosure act
• Ratio Decidendi
• Reorganization Law
• Reservation of title
• Right of access
• Right of residence
• Right of superstructure
• Right of way
• Role of Judiciary
• Rule of Law UK
• Scottish Law
• Securities Law
• Separation of property
• Shareholders' Meeting
• Silent Partnership
• Social Welfare Law
• Solicitors Regulation Authority
• Sources of Law
• Spouse pension rights after divorce
• Standard Terms and Conditions
• State Aid Law
• Statute Law
• Stock Exchange Law
• Trademark Law
• Trading Companies
• Types of Law
• UK Consumer Law
• UK Court System
• UK Data Protection Law
• UK Employment Law
• UK International Law
• UK Legal Ethics
• UK Legal Reforms
• UK Parliamentary Sovereignty
• US Legal System

Lerne mit deinen Freunden und bleibe auf dem richtigen Kurs mit deinen persönlichen Lernstatistiken

Nie wieder prokastinieren mit unseren Lernerinnerungen.

Definition of Law and Morality

Law and morality are two concepts that act as value systems and govern human behaviour in different aspects.

Understanding Law and Morality Concepts

Law represents the formal rules and regulations that have been established by a recognised authority, whereas morality is the informal value system that exists within society. These two concepts are intertwined, as they set the standards for what is considered right and wrong, and they often influence each other in various ways.

Law: A system of rules that a particular country or community recognises as regulating the actions of its members and which it may enforce by the imposition of penalties.

Morality: Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour.

Key Differences between Law and Morality

Although law and morality share some similarities, there are important differences between the two concepts:

• Law is created and enforced by a recognised authority, whereas morality is an informal value system adopted by individuals and societies.
• Law can be enforced with sanctions, while morality relies on social pressure and self-regulation.
• Law is often more specific and unambiguous, while moral values can vary among people and can be interpreted differently by each individual.

While both law and morality contribute to the governance of human behaviour, there is not always a clear-cut relationship between the two.

For example, lying is generally considered immoral, but it is not always illegal. Conversely, criminal laws such as those prohibiting theft are both legally and morally wrong.

The Role of Law and Morality in Society

Law and morality play crucial roles in governing social relationships, shaping beliefs, guiding behaviour, and maintaining order in society. They often complement and influence each other, and understanding their roles can help create a more cohesive and harmonious society.

Role of Law in Society

Law serves several essential functions in society:

• It provides an authoritative and clear set of rules for people to follow
• It establishes consequences for those who break the rules
• It settles disputes between individuals and groups
• It defines the structure and organisation of different institutions within society

Law helps maintain order by providing a framework for citizens to follow, creating a sense of security and stability. Moreover, law is an essential tool for protecting the rights and freedoms of individuals, ensuring fairness and justice in various aspects of life.

Role of Morality in Society

Morality shapes the behaviour of individuals and groups in society and serves several vital functions:

• It guides people on what is considered good and bad behaviour
• It helps people make decisions in complex situations
• It fosters a sense of social cohesion and shared values
• It can act as a check on individual desires, promoting altruism and empathy in the community

Morality helps create a more harmonious society by encouraging individuals to consider the well-being of others and make responsible decisions. Furthermore, morality can influence the development of laws, as laws may be based on prevailing moral values in a society.

Despite their differences, both law and morality contribute to the creation of a just and orderly society. By understanding the roles they play and how they interact, we can work towards cultivating a better understanding of the intricacies involved in social relationships, governance, and the establishment of rules and values within any community.

Connection Between Law and Morality

Law and morality, though distinct concepts, often influence and interact with each other in various ways. They provide guidance for human behaviour and contribute to regulating societal conduct. Understanding the connection between law and morality is essential, as it helps in appreciating the complexities involving the creation, implementation, and interpretation of laws in different contexts.

How Law and Morality Intersect

The intersection between law and morality is not always clear or constant; rather, it tends to change over time, as social values and attitudes evolve. Nonetheless, there are several ways in which law and morality intersect:

• Legal rules may be based on moral values, as societies often enact laws that reflect their ethical principles. For example, laws prohibiting murder and theft are rooted in moral beliefs regarding the sanctity of human life and the importance of respecting individual property rights.
• Moral values can influence legal interpretations and decisions. Judges , lawyers , and other legal professionals may rely on moral principles when faced with issues that are not explicitly covered by existing laws, or when existing laws result in apparent injustices or inconsistencies.
• The law sometimes acts as a catalyst for moral change in society. Legal reforms may be implemented to promote more progressive or egalitarian moral values, as evidenced by the introduction of laws decriminalising homosexuality or permitting same-sex marriage in many countries.
• Moral pressure may lead to legal change. When a societal consensus about moral values shifts, it can result in a push for the legal system to adapt accordingly. This can be seen in movements for environmental protection, gender equality, or drug policy reform.

For instance, the abolition of slavery in many countries was driven by both moral outrage and legal activism, illustrating the intertwined nature of law and morality in effecting social change.

Relation Between Law and Morality in the UK Legal System

In the United Kingdom, the relationship between law and morality comprises an essential aspect of the legal system . From the development of law to its interpretation and enforcement, moral principles play a significant role. Some critical features of the relationship between law and morality in the UK legal system include:

• Parliament's role in creating and amending legislation is largely guided by the moral values and norms prevailing in society at a given time. This may result in the modification of existing laws or the introduction of new laws that better align with changing moral standards.
• Judges , as the interpreters of the law, are tasked with making decisions that consider both the letter of the law and the broader moral implications of their rulings. This may involve using their discretion to strike a balance between justice and adherence to the legal code.
• Common law, which is derived from the decisions of judges over time, often reflects moral judgments and perceptions of justice. This can be observed in various areas of law, such as tort law , contract law , and family law , where legal principles and rules have been influenced by evolving moral values.
• Legal principles and doctrines, such as the concept of equity, demonstrate the flexible nature of the UK legal system to accommodate changing moral values and extend justice beyond the strict application of statutory law.

Cases on Law and Morality Relationship

Throughout history, there have been numerous legal cases that provide insights into the interplay between law and morality. These instances demonstrate the various ways in which moral values have contributed to the interpretation and application of laws in different contexts.

Some notable cases illustrating the relationship between law and morality include:

R v Brown (1994): In this case, the UK House of Lords held that consensual sadomasochistic activities were illegal, despite the absence of harm to non-consenting parties. The ruling relied on moral considerations, noting that such activities were harmful to the public interest and could not be legally condoned.

• Donoghue v Stevenson (1932): Often regarded as the cornerstone of modern tort law in the UK, this case established the "neighbour principle," which set the foundation for the duty of care concept. The case relied on moral principles, highlighting the importance of considering the reasonably foreseeable consequences of one's actions on others.
• R v Dudley and Stephens (1884): In this controversial case, the defendants were convicted of murder for killing and eating a fellow sailor to survive after a shipwreck. The court rejected the necessity defence, stating that the killing could not be morally justified, despite the extreme circumstances.
• R v Wolfenden (1957): This case led to the formation of the Wolfenden Committee, which recommended the decriminalisation of homosexuality in the UK. The Committee drew a distinction between criminal law, which should concern itself with public order and safety, and moral law, which should govern private conduct.

These cases show that the relationship between law and morality is a complex and evolving process, as legal systems need to balance the demands of justice, fairness, and public policy while remaining adaptable to evolving societal norms and values.

Difference Between Law and Morality

It is crucial to understand the difference between law and morality, as both are essential aspects of societal order and governance. Although they may sometimes overlap and influence each other, they are distinct concepts with unique foundations, scope, and enforcement mechanisms. Recognising the differences between law and morality allows a better understanding of their respective roles in shaping human behaviour, promoting justice, and guiding ethical decisions in various situations.

Key Distinctions in Law and Morality

There are several key distinctions between law and morality that set them apart and highlight their separate roles in society.

• Source: Law is derived from formal, recognised authorities, such as governments and legislative bodies that enact, amend, and repeal legal rules and regulations. Morality, on the other hand, is an informal system of values, norms, and beliefs that are culturally and socially influenced, often deeply rooted and not codified in the same manner as laws.
• Enforcement: Legal rules and penalties are enforceable by the state and its institutions, such as courts, police, and regulatory bodies. In contrast, morality is not strictly enforced by a central authority; it relies on individual conscience, social pressures, and informal sanctions to guide and correct behaviour.
• Scope and Application: Laws tend to be specific and relatively uniform, providing clear guidance on what is legally permissible or prohibited in a given jurisdiction. Morality, however, can be subjective and may differ from person to person or culture to culture, making it more challenging to codify and implement universally.
• Flexibility: Legal rules are usually more rigid and require formal changes or amendments if they are to be adjusted. Morality, however, can be more flexible and adaptive, as it is not constrained by the same institutional and procedural requirements of law. It can evolve over time and respond to changing social values and priorities.

These differences highlight the unique roles and functions of law and morality in society and demonstrate the varying ways in which these distinct concepts contribute to the regulation of human behaviour, the promotion of justice, and ethical decision-making.

Examples of Law and Morality Differences

In order to fully understand the differences between law and morality, it is helpful to explore specific examples showcasing instances where the two concepts diverge. These examples highlight their distinct nature and emphasise the importance of recognising their separate roles in society and the governance of human behaviour.

• Example: Tax avoidance involves using legal loopholes and strategies to minimise one's tax payable. While technically legal, it may be considered morally questionable, as it undermines tax revenue and may contribute to income inequality and social injustice.
• Example: Returning a lost wallet to its owner is morally commendable, as it shows honesty, integrity, and empathy. However, there is typically no legal obligation to return lost property, as the act is a personal moral choice rather than a legally mandated requirement.
• Example: Adultery is generally considered immoral, as it breaches trust and societal expectations within a committed relationship. However, in many jurisdictions, adultery is no longer a criminal offence , and legal sanctions are not imposed on those who engage in such behaviour.
• Example: Some legal regulations, such as traffic laws or building codes, are not directly derived from moral values but are primarily designed to ensure public safety and order, illustrating that not all legal rules are based on moral principles.
• Example: The civil rights movement in the United States led to significant legal reforms to end racial segregation and ensure equal rights for all citizens. These changes were driven by a moral imperative to promote social justice and equality, even though certain segments of society may have initially resisted or opposed the new legal standards.
• Example: When countries introduced laws to decriminalise homosexuality or allow same-sex marriage , these legislative changes initially encountered opposition from certain groups within society whose moral values did not align with the new legal provisions, highlighting the potential disconnect between law and prevailing morality.

These examples serve to underline the importance of recognising the differences between law and morality and appreciating the complexities associated with the interplay between these critical aspects of human behaviour, governance, and ethical decision-making.

Law and Morality - Key takeaways

Law and morality, both value systems, govern human behaviour in different ways: law is formal rules by a recognised authority, while morality is an informal value system within society.

Key differences between law and morality include enforcement, specificity, and origin: law comes from a recognised authority and is enforced, while morality relies on social pressure and can be interpreted differently by individuals.

Law and morality intersect by influencing legal interpretations, guiding human behaviour, and promoting social cohesion and shared values in society.

In the UK legal system, law and morality play significant roles from development to enforcement, including Parliament's creation and amendment of legislation and judges' interpretation of the law based on moral principles.

Examples of cases on law and morality relationship include R v Brown (1994), Donoghue v Stevenson (1932), R v Dudley and Stephens (1884), and R v Wolfenden (1957), which illustrate the complexities and evolving connection between law and morality.

Frequently Asked Questions about Law and Morality

--> what is the relationship between morality and law, --> should law and morality be separate, --> what is law and morality, --> what is the difference between law and morality, --> is law and morality the same, test your knowledge with multiple choice flashcards.

What is the definition of Law?

What is the definition of Morality?

What are the key differences between Law and Morality?

Your score:

Join the StudySmarter App and learn efficiently with millions of flashcards and more!

Learn with 52 law and morality flashcards in the free studysmarter app.

Already have an account? Log in

Law is a system of rules that a particular country or community recognises as regulating the actions of its members and which it may enforce by the imposition of penalties.

Morality is the principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour.

Law is created and enforced by an authority, can be enforced with sanctions, and is more specific; morality is an informal value system, relies on social pressure, and varies among people.

What are the main roles of Law in society?

The roles of Law in society include providing clear rules to follow, establishing consequences for rule breakers, settling disputes, and defining the structure of institutions within society.

What are the main roles of Morality in society?

Morality guides people on good and bad behaviour, helps them make decisions in complex situations, fosters social cohesion, and promotes altruism and empathy in the community.

How do legal rules and moral values intersect?

Legal rules may be based on moral values, as societies often enact laws that reflect their ethical principles, such as prohibitions against murder and theft. Moral values can also influence legal interpretations and decisions, and the law may sometimes act as a catalyst for moral change or be changed due to moral pressure.

of the users don't pass the Law and Morality quiz! Will you pass the quiz?

How would you like to learn this content?

Free law cheat sheet!

Everything you need to know on . A perfect summary so you can easily remember everything.

Join over 22 million students in learning with our StudySmarter App

The first learning app that truly has everything you need to ace your exams in one place

• Flashcards & Quizzes
• AI Study Assistant
• Study Planner
• Smart Note-Taking

Sign up to highlight and take notes. It’s 100% free.

This is still free to read, it's not a paywall.

You need to register to keep reading, create a free account to save this explanation..

Save explanations to your personalised space and access them anytime, anywhere!

By signing up, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and the Privacy Policy of StudySmarter.

Entdecke Lernmaterial in der StudySmarter-App

Law And Morality In Jurisprudence

Introduction.

For living peacefully in a society an individual follows various norms, conducts, values, rules, beliefs, etc. which tell how a person should behave in a society. It becomes important to create the difference between them in order to avoid ambiguity and conflict. One such deliberate effort is always taken when distinguishing between law and morality. These are such concepts which on some parts seem inter-related while in some other parts seem completely different concepts. Many Jurists debated on the same issue of law and morality in Jurisprudence and as a result, various views arose on the topic.

Black’s Law Dictionary says that law is “A body of rules of action or conduct prescribed by controlling authority and having binding legal force. That which must be obeyed and followed by citizens subject to sanctions or legal consequence is a law.” [1]

In simple words, the law is a bunch of rules and regulations formed by the authority(legislature) and enforced by the executive body which has legal sanctity. And which the citizens are obliged to follow in order to avoid the legal consequences.

Morality in simple words is the principles, values, beliefs and behaviour created and carried forward by the society. They do not have legal sanctity but bind a person to societal obligations or are dependent upon the conscience of the individual.

Example- Going to the temple and praying to God is morality but is not a legal sanction.

Many of the legislations are devoid of morality while there are also many legislations which along with law have morality as the base element. For example- a Live-in relationship is legal but is not in consensus with morality. Whereas, the law against human trafficking has morality as its element.

Law and Morality in Jurisprudence

Law and morals are the systems which govern the behaviour of individuals in society. Laws are rules and regulations which are sanctioned by the authority and are compulsory to follow. While morals are the standards of behaviour that individuals should follow in order to live peacefully with acceptability but they are not compulsory like law. These two concepts have a complex relationship which has evolved over time. In ancient times, law and morality were seen as similar concepts but with time and development, it has been clarified that these two are different but interdependent concepts.

History of Law and Morality

Because of their budding stage, law and morals were not properly distinguished during ancient times. Dharma in India was regarded as the Law and morality. Taking the example of Hindu Law which was primarily derived from the Vedas and smritis, which were actually the values of people. They signified the identicality between law and morals. However, with the advent of Mimansa and commentaries, certain principles were put forth based on which distinction was made between the obligatory rules and the recommendatory rules. The former are the rules which are mandatory to be followed and are considered law whereas the latter ones are not mandatory rules but they are considered good for the person if they are followed, they are the morals.

In the middle age period, the morals of Christianity were considered as the basis of law and the Bible had great influence over the legal regulations.

Relationship between Law and Morality

1. Moral as the origin of law

In ancient times there was no clear distinction between law and morality . And due to this lack of distinction, the origin of every law was found in the principles which people thought as morally correct. In the end, the state selected those morally correct principles and made them into laws, thus forming similarities between law and morality . For example, It is morally wrong to commit theft or robbery, the state gave this moral, the form of law. Even though the distinction between law and morals has been put forth but morals form an integral part of the law. Most of the laws have some or the other principles of morality.

2. Moral as the test of law

Many Jurists are of the opinion that those laws which do not follow morality must be removed, as the end purpose of every law is to impart justice and ensure the welfare of the people.

While making any law it always has to be seen that, whether it is in consonance with moral values or not, if it doesn’t follow the moral standards it should be removed.

3. Morality as the end of the law

Laws were made to serve the purpose of creating a society having the elements of fairness, justice and equality. Laws were made for the purpose of providing justice to a person who suffered from something wrong. And on the other hand, morality provided certain standards to sustain some order in society with fewer conflicts. In other words, the object of morality is to remove conflicts from society. Thus we can see, that the main object of law and morality is the same making both the concepts related to each other.

Difference between Law and Morality

Although we can see law and Morality in some aspects as interdependent and also identical concepts. But there are some factors which differentiate these two.

1. It is the external source from which the law is obtained, in simple words law is derived from the rules and regulations, whereas morality is derived from the individual’s inner self (internal source) i.e. the individual mind of the person.

2. Laws are focused upon the individual’s conduct for which it entrusts certain standards whereas morality is concerned with the innate values of the conduct in other words it is focused upon the motive.

3. Laws don’t change from person to person, it treats everyone the same, whereas morality is a subjective concept, it differs for every person based on their conscience.

4. Laws are influenced by morality, which means they are created by taking morals into consideration. Morality, on the other hand, existed way before the laws were formulated.

5. There is punishment for the disobedience of law but in morality, there is no such punishment for anything done which is wrong morally.

6. Laws are mandatory to be followed as laid down by the sovereign for the people governed by it. However, morality is rather a personal concept it doesn’t lay down certain mandatory conduct have to be followed.

7. Laws control the behaviour of a person legally whereas morals control the behaviour of a person morally.

Philosophies Regarding Law and Morality

The evolution of law was aided by two broad theories of legal positivism ( analytical school ) and natural law theory.

The natural law theory states that any law which is unjust and hence infringes the principle of morality, cannot be considered as law. In this theory, it is inferred that the laws and morality are deeply interconnected. Natural law gives the idea that Morality in human beings is derived from nature which took the form of rules and regulations. The Central idea behind natural law is that it embodies moral principles which depend upon the nature of the universe and which can be discovered for natural reasons. Jurists who aided this theory of natural law were Augustine , Thomas Aquinas , Lon Fuller, John Locke and many more.

Legal positivism states that legal entities sans morality. The theory does not deny the impact of morals on laws but says that the laws are created by men and hence should have a clear distinction from morality. It emphasises that laws and morality are two different concepts and laws are the result of sovereign power and not morality. Theorists in support of legal positivism were John Austin and H.L.A Hart.

Debate between Hart and Fuller

Hart accepted the law as a command. He emphasised the separation of positive law from morality. He believed that judicial decisions are to be deduced from the pre-determined rules without recourse to social aims, policies and morality. Rational arguments cannot defend moral judgements.

According to Hart, the law is a system having two types of rules providing key to the science of Jurisprudence. These rules are Primary Rules and Secondary Rules. Primary rules impose duties whereas Secondary Rules give power and the essence of law is in the union of these two rules.

Primary rules are binding as they impose a duty upon the individuals whereas Secondary Rules being power conferring, empowers the legislators to formulate or modify policies according to the needs of the society.

Lon Fuller criticized his views of Hart on the separation of law and morality. He believed the legal system is made for regulating the conduct of human beings and therefore it must have in law the element of “it is” and “it ought to be”. In other words, it means that law and morality cannot be divorced from each other. Fuller maintained that law is a product of sustained purpose and efforts which contains its own implicit morality. He believes that law cannot fully serve its purpose of imparting justice and preventing misery if they do not conform to the “internal morality”. According to Fuller, eight conditions forming the internal morality are-

• Law should be general
• It should be publicly promulgated
• Laws should be prospective in nature (they should apply to future behaviour, not to the past).
• Laws should be clear and intelligible
• There should be no contradiction between laws
• It should be constant
• There must be the possibility to obey the law
• The law should be administered in a way that should not diverge from its obvious and apparent meaning.

These eight principles were highly criticized by Hart. According to him, these principles are the means of efficiency and are not defining morality.

Analysis of the Debate

Looking at the thoughts of both these theorists we can say that their object was to achieve justice and order but their ways were different. There are elements which contributes to the formation of law, therefore the matter cannot be simply put as the relationship between law and morals, as so many factors influence law, and one of them is moral.

In some aspects of law, we find the element of morality while in some laws morality does not play many parts for eg, legalising of abortion. We can say that in certain laws, the need for perfectly differentiating between the law and morality has to be identified while in some laws the difference between the law and morality can be set aside and certain overlapping between them can be allowed. But it is always the legal idea which prevails over subjective morality.

Dudley and Stephens Case [2]

In this case, the principles of law and morality were distinguished while punishing the grave offence of cannibalism. According to the facts of the case, the accused were the sea men. Their ship capsized in a storm they along with a boy, about seventeen years of age managed to float on a wooden plank. They continued to drift for many days without food and drinking water. When the death of starvation and thirst was imminent, they killed the boy and continued to eat his flesh for a few days until they were rescued. On being prosecuted for murder, they pleaded that self-preservation was the utmost necessity and they had no option except to kill the boy.

Judgement of the court

The court held that in order to save his own life a person cannot sacrifice another person’s life. And in this case, there was no such evidence which could justify their killing of the boy and hence they were guilty of murder. Although it was considered morally justifiable, for saving the life of all of them their action cannot be legally justified. One cannot kill another person for overcoming the inconvenience of attempting to save his life and claim it justifiable.

Law has heterogeneous properties it contains various elements which contribute to making better law and among these, morality is one the element. In ancient times morality and laws were considered similar concepts but with the development of time, these two concepts were separated and discussed properly. Debates between the theorists lead to the formation of different views regarding the relations as well as the distinction between law and morality. By analysing these two concepts we find that morals in some aspects have an effect on the laws but they do not override the legal entity as morality is subjective.

[1] Black’s Law Dictionary, 6 th ed., s.v. “law”.

[2] Dudley and Stephens (1884) 14 QBD 273.

[3] Studies in Jurisprudence and legal theory, Dr. V.N Paranjape.

[4] https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/jurisprudence/legal-positivism.php#:~:text=In%20the%20legal%20positivists%20point,cease%20to%20be%20legal%20rules.

[5] https://legalstudymaterial.com/relationship-between-law-and-morality/#Relationship_between_law_and_morality.

[6] https://www.grin.com/document/1038415.

This article has been written by Simran Kingrani, 3rd Year B.A LL.B Student at the University College of Law, MSU

Share This Post

Related posts.

Home » Public » What is the Difference Between Law and Morality

What is the Difference Between Law and Morality

The main difference between law and morality is that law refers to the set of rules and regulations enforced by the state to regulate the human behaviour in society whereas morality refers to the ethical code of conduct for a human being . Hence, morality stands are the basis for the law while morality is ensured by living according to the law.

Law and morality are extrinsically related, and they have been used interchangeably since ancient times. However, we can find differences between law and morality with concern to several prime factors.

Key Areas Covered

1. What is Law      – Definition, Characteristics  2. What is Morality      – Definition, Characteristics  3. What is the Relationship Between Law and Morality      – Outline of Common Features 4. What is the Difference Between Law and Morality      – Comparison of Key Differences

Ethics, Morality, Morals, Law, Sociology

What is Law

Law refers to the system of rules and regulations, created, and enforced by the administrative authority of a society/country with the intention of regulating human behaviour for the common good. Accordingly, it can be elaborated as fair and just rules of conduct for a community. Moreover, the enforcement of the body of rules is through a controlling authority.

Hence, the law refers to the rules and regulations in society to maintain the order and decorum in a particular societal community. Laws, therefore, should be obeyed and respected by all those living in that society or country. Accordingly, punishments are enforced to those who violate these laws.

There are several rules and laws with regard to several aspects in a country or society. They can be laws regarding matrimony, laws regarding infrastructure and transport, laws regarding lifestyles, laws regarding finances and economy, etc. These are created by the state and its institutions. However, these laws are enforced according to their acceptance by the majority of the people. Hence, they may vary from society to society and country to country.

Laws can come in the form of state constitutions, treaties, Acts , local laws, statutes, executive orders, etc. Overall, they govern what a person should and should not do. Consequently, law enforced by the ruling authority according to the desire of the majority of the people of that particular society regulate the proper maintenance of the orderliness of that society. Moreover, some necessities in lawmaking are;

• The authority of the state
• The authorized institutions that have the right to formulate laws
• These institutions have been given the authority to do so by the state
• Sanctions/ punishments exist for breaking the law
• The sanctions are imposed by those given state authority to do so.

Therefore, laws mandate its citizens of what should be followed, what should not be followed (what is right and just) along with the sanctions or penalties for breaking those laws. More importantly, law plays a central role in the political, social and economic life in the country.

What is Morality

Morality refers to the social principles that define what is morally right and morally wrong. In brief, it is the ethical code of conduct of a person. The main aspect that defines this right or wrong quality of action under moral terms is the intention of the person committing that particular action. Therefore, morality is concerned with both the external acts and internal motives for that action or occurrence.

Hence, social concepts such as ethics, religious teachings, etc. directly influence in creating morality standard in a certain community or country. Hence, it is these social concepts that formulate morality, unlike the law that is formulated by the state. 

However, morality strongly influences the emergence of laws as well. For instance, the crimes and other actions identified as illegal under the law are those that are identified as immoral by morality. Therefore, morality stands as the basis for the emergence of laws.

Moreover, law enforces punishment to those who violate the laws and create discrepancy for the lives of others while there are no such enforced punishments for those who live in an immoral way or commit immoral acts. However, morality emphasizes the fact that every immoral action is followed by negative consequences that the doer will someday have to suffer.

Thus, unlike law, the rules and regulations in morality are not mandates or acts. Instead, they are beliefs and practices.

Relationship Between Law and Morality

• Morality influences the law, providing ethical reasons as to why the immoral actions are considered illegal by the law. Hence, morality stands as the fundamental basis for the ideal set of laws in a country.
• Moreover, morality aims at uplifting the moral standards of the people while the core aim of the law is also the same thing.

Difference Between Law and Morality

Law is the system of rules which a particular country or community recognizes as regulating the actions of its members and which it may enforce by the imposition of penalties. On the other hand, morality is the set of ethical principles that define what is morally right and morally wrong. Thus, this is the main difference between law and morality.

Enforcement

Law is enforced by the ruling bodies of a country; state or a community while there is no such a significant body to enforce moral codes; however, they are followed by those that are taught by the religious teachings and social ethics. Hence, this is a difference between law and morality. 

Constitution

Moreover, another difference between law and morality is that laws creates the constitution of a country whereas there is no direct connection with the constitution in morality.

Besides, morality emerged before the ideal set of laws. Therefore, morality influenced the emergence of laws in a community or a country. 

Sanctions and Punishments

Sanctions and punishments is also a major difference between law and morality. There are direct punishments for those who violate the law while there are no such enforced direct punishments for those who do immoral acts.

Law is direct and rough with punishments whereas morality can be followed or not according to the person’s choice. However, it is this quality of law that ensures the morality of people. SO, this is another difference between law and morality. 

Law and morality are related since they both share the same aim of uplifting the moral standards and eventually the life of humans. The main difference between law and morality is that law refers to the set of rules and regulations enforced by the state to regulate the human behaviour in society whereas morality refers to the ethical code of conduct for a human being. Moreover, punishments are enforced by law for the violation of them whereas there is no such enforcement of punishments in morality for committing immoral acts.

1. The Atomism of Democritus, 10 Sept. 2001, Available here . 2. Britannica, The Editors of Encyclopaedia. “Law.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 8 Feb. 2018, Available here . 3. “Morality.” AllAboutPhilosophy.org, Available here .

Image Courtesy:

1. “802301” (CC0) via Pixabay 2. “A sailor is stripped to the waist, tied to a ladder and bein Wellcome V0041675” By Welcome Images (CC BY 4.0) via Commons Wikimedia 3. “Image from page 42 of “The doctrine of morality: or, A view of human life, according to the stoick philosophy By Internet Archive Book Images (No known copyright restrictions) via Flickr 4. “Moral Compass” By Paul Downey (CC BY 2.0) via Flickr

About the Author: Upen

Upen, BA (Honours) in Languages and Linguistics, has academic experiences and knowledge on international relations and politics. Her academic interests are English language, European and Oriental Languages, Internal Affairs and International Politics, and Psychology.

​You May Also Like These

Leave a reply cancel reply.

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Architecture
• History of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• History of Art
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical Literature
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Agriculture
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• Political History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Linguistics
• Browse content in Literature
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cultural Studies
• Technology and Society
• Browse content in Law
• Company and Commercial Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Local Government Law
• Criminal Law
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Public International Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Society
• Law and Politics
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Police Regional Planning
• Property Law
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Microbiology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Palaeontology
• Environmental Science
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Psychology
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Systems
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Browse content in Environment
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Environmental Politics
• International Relations
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Economy
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Policy
• Russian Politics
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• Native American Studies
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Economic Sociology
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Migration Studies
• Organizations
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Reviews and Awards
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

8 Law and Morality: Essays in Applied Ethics

• Published: March 2000
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

The essay included here discusses the social, historical, and theoretical foundations of law and morality in the context of applied ethics. It offers an argument that reconciles the demands of morality and law alike and talks about common authority and justice, law and its relationship with the concept of utility, the principle of organic development as the exclusive source of law, social contract, right as the synthesis of freedom and equality, moral right and moral duty, crime and the criminal law theory of retribution and deterrence, death penalty, coercive justice as moral obligation, and criminal justice. In addition, the text explains the two fundamental sources of law: the elemental creative work of the national spirit and the free will of an individual.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

• Google Scholar Indexing
• GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code

Institutional access

• Sign in with a library card Sign in with username/password Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Sign in with a library card

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.