Introduction
A starting point for this essay will be on what is natural law and morality? Natural law is a system of law determined by the nature and ‘it provides a name for the point of intersection between law and morals’. Whereas, morality is a set of beliefs, values, principles and standard of behavior enforced informally through social pressure.
In this essay, it will be looking at how Fuller draws a distinction between internal and external moralities in law with his debate with Hart. This will be discussed with the moral basis of law.
Hart v Fuller
The first debate between Hart and Fuller was in the case of where under the Third Reich where the debate focused on the decision of a post-war West German Court. The wife wished her husband …show more content…
Fuller explained inner morality by used of the example of King Rex, who ruled the country with unlimited law making power and he is utterly selfish, incompetent and uncaring. Therefore, he issues commands to reward who obey him and punish who disobey him. Moreover, he does not lay down any rules. Because of his incompetence, he is not attempting to find out who has been disobedient and who is obedient. Consequently, he might punish and rewards the wrong ones. Therefore, there will be no meaningful connection between his actions and his command and his aim will not be achieved which leads him fails to produce law. Besides that, commands given by the Rex are ambiguous and confuse which makes the peoples confuse in what Rex want them to do. Sometimes, he commands on what should be done yesterday rather than in the future. Again, Rex is incapable to make law of guiding conduct. Fuller used this analogy to demonstrate, how Nazi regime debased and destroyed the legal system through ad hoc commands, retroactive laws, ad hominem laws, secret enactments, punishment without trial, indemnities for state condoned crimes, official disregard for the law and the practice of
A starting point for this essay will be on what is natural law and morality? Natural law is a system of law determined by the nature and ‘it provides a name for the point of intersection between law and morals’. Whereas, morality is a set of beliefs, values, principles and standard of behavior enforced informally through social pressure.
In this essay, it will be looking at how Fuller draws a distinction between internal and external moralities in law with his debate with Hart. This will be discussed with the moral basis of law.
Hart v Fuller
The first debate between Hart and Fuller was in the case of where under the Third Reich where the debate focused on the decision of a post-war West German Court. The wife wished her husband …show more content…
Fuller explained inner morality by used of the example of King Rex, who ruled the country with unlimited law making power and he is utterly selfish, incompetent and uncaring. Therefore, he issues commands to reward who obey him and punish who disobey him. Moreover, he does not lay down any rules. Because of his incompetence, he is not attempting to find out who has been disobedient and who is obedient. Consequently, he might punish and rewards the wrong ones. Therefore, there will be no meaningful connection between his actions and his command and his aim will not be achieved which leads him fails to produce law. Besides that, commands given by the Rex are ambiguous and confuse which makes the peoples confuse in what Rex want them to do. Sometimes, he commands on what should be done yesterday rather than in the future. Again, Rex is incapable to make law of guiding conduct. Fuller used this analogy to demonstrate, how Nazi regime debased and destroyed the legal system through ad hoc commands, retroactive laws, ad hominem laws, secret enactments, punishment without trial, indemnities for state condoned crimes, official disregard for the law and the practice of