In the textbook Tort Law the authors write, “The common thread interweaving most torts is the notion that socially unreasonable conduct should be penalized and those who are its victims should be compensated. Of course, determining what is unreasonable is a formidable task, because reasonableness like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. The overall goal in defining reasonableness is to balance the plaintiff’s need for protection against the defendant’s claim of freedom to pursue his own ends.” There are questions that must be asked in regards to the truth of this statement. Are there any problems with the substance given by the authors of the quote to their standard of “socially reasonable conduct”, is social utility (the highest public
…show more content…
“Social utility” is a term that changes through time and is does not withstand the test of time. Pharaoh's bondage of the Jewish people, the Confederates use of slaves, Hitler’s plan of genocide, and abortion are acts that are morally unacceptable. However, each act was and is committed on behalf of “social utility”. Every man is created equal, by God, and is equal under the law. For a society to agree to live according to “social utility” is treason against the Great King of Heaven, because “social utility” replaces the law of God with the reasoning of man. The heart of man is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked, and because man’s heart is deceitfully wicked, what society believes is “socially useful” is not always …show more content…
The authors of Tort Law state, “Of course, determining what is unreasonable is a formidable task, because reasonableness like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.” “Determining what is unreasonable is a formidable task” when it is determined by the reason of man. The eye a is a deceitful tool. In Genesis 3 it is recorded, “And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.” Just as the “beauty in the eye of the beholder” led to the fall of man, this philosophy of law will create a society that accepts and promotes the acts of sinful
“Social utility” is a term that changes through time and is does not withstand the test of time. Pharaoh's bondage of the Jewish people, the Confederates use of slaves, Hitler’s plan of genocide, and abortion are acts that are morally unacceptable. However, each act was and is committed on behalf of “social utility”. Every man is created equal, by God, and is equal under the law. For a society to agree to live according to “social utility” is treason against the Great King of Heaven, because “social utility” replaces the law of God with the reasoning of man. The heart of man is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked, and because man’s heart is deceitfully wicked, what society believes is “socially useful” is not always …show more content…
The authors of Tort Law state, “Of course, determining what is unreasonable is a formidable task, because reasonableness like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.” “Determining what is unreasonable is a formidable task” when it is determined by the reason of man. The eye a is a deceitful tool. In Genesis 3 it is recorded, “And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.” Just as the “beauty in the eye of the beholder” led to the fall of man, this philosophy of law will create a society that accepts and promotes the acts of sinful