In a profound departure from natural law theory, Austin argued that law and morality are two separate things, and posited that they ought to remain that way. Laws, according to Austin, are human-made rather than divine in origin. Therefore, rules are set forth by an intelligent, sovereign lawmaker for their political inferior. Although these rules ought to conform to divine law, they are not rendered powerless if they do not, as a natural law theorist like Blackstone would argue. Austin gives us the example of a man who commits a relatively harmless crime which is punishable by death under the law. He has the right to argue that the law is unjust, but he will be hanged despite his protestations. Therefore, Austin argues, the morality of the law does not affect a sovereign power’s ability to punish the
In a profound departure from natural law theory, Austin argued that law and morality are two separate things, and posited that they ought to remain that way. Laws, according to Austin, are human-made rather than divine in origin. Therefore, rules are set forth by an intelligent, sovereign lawmaker for their political inferior. Although these rules ought to conform to divine law, they are not rendered powerless if they do not, as a natural law theorist like Blackstone would argue. Austin gives us the example of a man who commits a relatively harmless crime which is punishable by death under the law. He has the right to argue that the law is unjust, but he will be hanged despite his protestations. Therefore, Austin argues, the morality of the law does not affect a sovereign power’s ability to punish the