Austin's model of law

Austin holds a positivist conception of law. According to him, law is a general command of a sovereign. There are two crucial components in his definition of law. First, a sovereign is a body of society who delivers command but has no need to abbey others. It is seen A's the pedigree or source of legitimacy of law. Second, the command given by a sovereign must be in a general sense, that is, the command must be valid for all. It is opposite to particular command that is effective in particular situation. But there is also doubt about the existence of particular command and it is claimed that any so called particular commands are also general commands. They are general in the sense that they are effective to some class of action or person.

Austin, A's a positivist, deny the necessary connection between law and morality. The legitimacy of law does not depends on whether the content of law is morally good or bad but on the source where it originates, that is, the sovereign delivering the command. A command is the expression of a wish backed up by a sanction. A sanction is supposed to be against evil of desire. Do not murder. This is a command which must be complied because it is delivered by a sovereign. Once some one destroys it, she will be sanctioned. The duty of not murdering is imposed by the command. So, we call it duty-imposing rules.

Hart, though A's a positivist, has criticism against Austin. He develops a kind of power-conferring rules which is excluded by Austin's model. For example, getting married is also a legal issue but the law does not command everyone to get married. It applies to you only when you choose to get married. Some say that the nullity or invalidity of particular conduct is also a sanction. If one do not sign contract, the contract will be invalid and the desired goal will not be realized without protection of law. But nullify need not be an evil or undesirable. Some may welcome the nullity of marriage. Not all desirable thing are necessarily sanction. For example, to relieve the pain of my teeth, I go to have a dental surgery. The pain of surgery is not a sanction because of my intention.

Cp 8254

Cp 8
254
Revised justice principle
Most extensive to fully
Basic liberties
For development of individual moral capacities
No clear reason for priority of liberty
It is different from argument of first principle
Basic liberties constitute an absolute system, but not single liberty in it is absolute.
Equal basic liberties are not equal on worth
Liberty is the same but the value for people are different because they have different means to access it. Liberty is not of equal value.

Political liberties is crucial to equal status of citizenship. Warrant the equal value of these liberties. Fair value

Self respect, a basic liberty, some social condition are required. Complex plan of life is more preferable than simple one's.
Association, for similar interest and communication
InEquality in Common wealth will undermines the equal value of liberties

Not all talents are equally emphasized in particular society. Some talented persons will lose their self respect.

In some society where material condition is not satisfied , concern of liberty is not that important for them.

Justice does not applied to animals for their lack of moral capacity.

Pains is bad in itself. Pain is crucial to wrongness of act.
Harm principle is wider than liberty principle.
Freedom is good but not the only good.

Scarce resource

Scarce resource
Pluralism
Neutrality
Public reason
Disability
Relationship between different conceptions of goods
Political area of social life
Neutral between different conception of goods rather than different conception of justice or rights in other theories, like anti liberal theory.
Free standing is not based on comprehensive position
Overlapping consensus
Political liberalism is not based on any comprehensive theories but each of them can find some support for the political conception from their particular points.

Respect for person argument, man as equal free agent, should choose by themselves. Importance of free choice, give value
Be tolerated not for it's free choice but it's good from particular point.
Minimum argument

Fetus abortion
Whether fetus is a human life?
This should be settled before bracketing controversy
Like the problem of slavery
Whether you treat them A's human being before you talk about justice
The premise
Once fetus has a right to life, abortion will be murder.
If not, it will depend on woman's decision.

Be what we should be

Be what we should be
To choose what human beings should be between what human beings could be and then discuss what human beings would be in spite of what human beings are being currently, namely, how to get human beings to be what they should be in proper way. It is respectively about the natural essence of man, the ethical nature of man and the political nature of human society.