This is only one of many mysteries about the relationship between the domains of legality and morality, but it indicates a significant source of conflict and confusion. I can say that I do not agree with the person who participated in the discussion on the clinical case and who said that laws are the end of the story. That`s not all. Here are some actions that might be illegal but not immoral: The aforementioned law enforcement aspect is different from morality. Parliament must take into account the reality of the application of the law when it adopts the law. The well-known problems that arose during prohibition made this clear. Morality has no such concern – something is wrong, whether we can get people to abstain from it or not. Legally, it is also necessary to take into account that when prosecuting offenders, evidence must be presented to the court in order to prove the crime. Ethicists often discuss what is right and wrong, but don`t spend much time worrying about how to prove that someone has done something wrong.
We often hear the opinion: „Why do I need ethics? I can just follow the law! The law is how society has formalized the ethical principles we are supposed to follow. So if I`m just following the law, I`m making sure I`m doing the right thing morally! Morality usually involves principles and rules about how a person should and should not behave. Morality can be approached descriptively, as a social scientist might do when discussing the views of a particular culture (descriptive ethics), or normatively, as a religious believer, when arguing that certain moral rules are the right ones (normative ethics). Or you can deal with metaethics as an ethicist and ask questions about the meaning and justification of moral language and claims. We want to catch the bad guys and promote justice. But how can this happen if we don`t denounce immoral behavior, even if it`s legal? Perhaps our willingness to give people carte blanche when they do bad things, even if they are legal, undermines the likelihood that people will follow the rules, let alone the spirit of the rule. False (left) and right relationship between laws and moral rules. So if we consider morality and law as social institutions, we see that violating moral rules is a disgrace, violating legal rules brings you fines or jail. The law, unlike morality, has the enforcement power of the state behind it. Those who act immorally, for example, may merit the scorn of others, but do not suffer such punishment from the state unless they act illegally.
(Some religious traditions, however, assert that immoral individuals can be punished by God in their earthly life or in an afterlife.) 01. I give a person a certain amount of money that is completely legal. Later, I ask him a favor, I`m one step away from being a snail. It`s completely legal, but if someone betrays me, it`s unethical. Legal but immoral acts are also common. For example, it is legal to look for tax loopholes and try to trick the system to reduce taxes. This can go as far as companies move their international headquarters to unlikely locations like some Caribbean islands or Ireland just to avoid paying regular taxes in their actual home (and business) country. While such behavior is legal, it is clearly immoral. A company that makes billions of dollars from consumers in a given country has a moral obligation to pay taxes in that country, thereby contributing to that country`s social security systems, public infrastructure, health care, schools, etc. Escaping this responsibility, even if it is legal, is not morally just. For example, some things are immoral but completely legal. You can probably find many of your own powerful examples, but we`ll only offer a few.
First, if you don`t tip in a restaurant, it`s not illegal; But it seems like a crime, especially if the service is good. As another example, wealthy individuals and companies are often heavily criticized for using loopholes, offshore accounts and other systems to avoid taxes. However, businesses rely more than individuals on publicly funded resources to generate wealth, including routes for shipping goods and services, energy and communications infrastructure, law enforcement, national defense, and bureaucracies that support state, domestic, and international trade. It`s not hard to think of something. For example, let`s say you`re a pedestrian at a red light. Across the street, through the cars that pass each other in front of you, you will see a small child playing. And suddenly, the child seems to be running down the busy street! Starting with Adam and Eve and the forbidden fruit tree, becoming true becoming human has always been about claiming the right to decide for oneself what one considers a permissible act. Moral autonomy and the freedom to decide for ourselves are the essence of what makes us human and the basis of all that is valuable in us. Of course, law and morality are often together on a particular issue. For example, it is both immoral and illegal to kill and steal. We are lucky in such cases, because then we do not have to choose between law and morality. But since there is no positive relationship of any kind between legality and morality, it is pure coincidence that they coincide.
The criteria of right and wrong come from one source (indeed, multiple sources) that are outside government. They existed even before a current government was formalized. And, of course, they continue to exist during and after a revolution and the formation of a new government. The government cannot and cannot make it exist. Rules and laws exist to protect and promote the functioning of communities.