Should morality be divorced from law 100% and vice versa

Started by The Black Ghost3 pages

"And just make sure you mop all that blood up... See you tommorow Larry" 😂

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
From where did they come, though?

Hmm....interesting.

Society would have began from some wild people who decided to band together. The wild men would surely be accustomed to killing, but the bands needed to function and accordingly made rules. The rules, such as no killing, would indeed serve to maintain order. Overtime, these rules would be deemed essential to the survival of a society and would turn into what many refer to as "morals".

Victor Von Doom is right.

Originally posted by The Black Ghost
But if no one cared if people was murdered there could be social order- it would just be a very strange soicety.

No. The society could never function because societies would never actually form. The everlooming threat of murder would never allow the first band of "society...makers" to create a society.

Originally posted by StyleTime
I understand what you mean, but it looks like a "chicken or the egg" scenario to me.

How can we know the morals did not come first and the societal upkeep was an afterthought and side-effect?

I think it's not like that, since either can exist without the other, so one might have been first and the other at some point split from it but they are not necessarily and closely connected.

Law is supposed to protect the values of society. Every society has some kind of morality.