Legal Positivism: Hart, Austin, Bentham

1209 words 5 pages
A Positivist's World: Morality Holds No Place Close to the Heart Islamic law, often known as Shariah law, occasionally contrasts with many's view of what is moral or just. However, when viewed under the light of positivism, all law is divorced from a system of ethics. Legality is not, inherently nor intentionally, compliant with a code of behavior. Law is, as it is created by the ruling class, designed to benefit those in power. Morals and sentiment do not play a role in the government, nor the rules that the government establishes. Legal positivism is a school of thought in the science of law or jurisprudence from the Latin term juris prudentia, which means "the study, knowledge, or science of law"; or in the United States, it is …show more content…

Because ethics are not remotely tied to legal issues, a binding set of laws that benefit leadership is an impossibility to avoid, like tax breaks for the rich. The law in question, if viewed in a different light, could be taken as unethical because it turns a blind eye to familial sexual abuse, particularly from husband to wife. In doing this, it would even subtly approve such actions. Although, when examining the legitimacy or reasoning behind the law you have to examine and judge it based upon the system it was made and social norm of both current times and pas. However, with a positivist outlook, it is clear that such a law was nearly inevitable. Islam, as a highly patriarchal society, provides a community where this is easily accepted and integrated and only affects those of “Afghanistan's Shi'i Muslim community, which makes up about 20% of it's 30 million population”. Because morals do not apply to whether laws are just, it would be impossible to avoid acts meant solely to benefit the controlling faction of the group. Therefore, it is ridiculous to imply that a set of ethics and morals can be applied to the rules leadership chooses to enforce especially when within the culture itself those do not find any reason to protest or create any upheaval; because even within a country that suppresses a right to voice and opinion in