Part 1: Implications of Changing Laws Based on the Article
In pursuing a just and equitable society, the stability and predictability of laws play a crucial role. The article “Laws should not constantly change” by Matthew Bransgrove raises significant concerns about the detrimental consequences of frequent alterations to legal frameworks. The disruptions caused by law changes extend beyond impacting long-term planning for individuals and businesses. The ethical and philosophical ramifications are extensive, affecting the foundations of governance, societal well-being, and power balance. This essay aims to provide an insight into what altering legislation signifies from both ethical and philosophical angles and recognize its potential for driving a significant impact on our framework’s general nature.
After reading the article, the initial perspective was the need for a balance between stability and adaptability in the legal system. While Bransgrove (2015) argues against constant changes in laws, citing the negative consequences they bring, it is crucial to consider that some level of flexibility and evolution in legislation is necessary to address emerging societal challenges, rectify injustices, and accommodate changing circumstances. This perspective recognizes the value of settled laws in providing stability and certainty but also acknowledges the importance of periodically revisiting and revising laws to ensure their relevance and effectiveness. Striking a balance between the two is crucial to maintain a just and responsive legal system.
Based on the article’s review, an ethical and philosophical consideration challenges the article’s considerations. One perspective that challenges the idea of laws remaining unchanged for extended periods is the notion of progressivism or the belief in society’s ongoing improvement and development. From an ethical standpoint, proponents of progressivism argue that laws should not be treated as static entities but as living documents that need to evolve in response to societal advancements, changing values, and emerging ethical dilemmas (Nugent, 2009).
Philosophically, this perspective aligns with legal positivism, which asserts that laws are human-made and subject to revision and improvement as our understanding of justice and morality progresses. Raz et al. (2013) suggest that it challenges the notion that settled laws should be preserved indefinitely, suggesting that legal frameworks should be dynamic to ensure that they reflect society’s evolving needs and values.
This ethical and philosophical consideration posits that a stagnant legal system could perpetuate outdated norms, inequality, and injustice while embracing a more adaptive approach allows for a more just and responsive society. It urges us to carefully evaluate the balance between stability and adaptability, recognizing that ethical progress often requires thoughtful and timely updates to our legal frameworks (Scheb & Sharma, 2023).
Part 2: Argument for ethical/philosophical reasoning for changing laws.
The ethical and philosophical reasoning for changing laws rests on the fundamental principles of justice, fairness, and progress. Society is dynamic, and as our understanding of morality and human rights evolves, laws must adapt to reflect these advancements. By embracing change in legislation, we can address historical injustices, rectify systemic biases, and promote equality for marginalized groups (Scheb & Sharma, 2023).
One ethical consideration is the principle of justice which emphasizes creating a society that treats each person fairly and with equal opportunities. Because social values and moral standards are fluid, updating laws to reflect our evolving conception of justice may become necessary. Additionally, the concept of moral progress supports the reasoning for changing laws. According to Sorokin (2017), by revisiting and revising laws, we acknowledge that our previous legal frameworks may have been incomplete or flawed, and we strive to create more just and equitable systems. This philosophical approach recognizes that the law should reflect our collective moral compass, continuously refined to better align with our shared values.
In conclusion, discussing the ethical and philosophical implications of changing laws reveals a complex landscape with competing perspectives. While the article highlights the importance of stability, we must also consider the ethical reasoning that supports the need for change. Adapting laws ensures justice, fairness, and progress by addressing historical injustices and emerging ethical challenges. Striking a balance between stability and adaptability is crucial for creating a legal framework that reflects our evolving moral understanding and promotes a just and equitable society. Ongoing dialogue and careful deliberation are necessary to uphold individual rights and facilitate ethical and philosophical growth.
References
Bransgrove, M. (2015). Laws should not constantly change. Extracted from “Principles of Good Government” by Matthew Bransgrove.
Nugent, W. (2009). Progressivism: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
Raz, J., Kavanagh, A., & Oberdiek, J. (2013). Legal positivism and the sources of law. Arguing About Law, 117.
Scheb, J. M., & Sharma, H. (2023). An introduction to the American legal system. Aspen Publishing.
Sorokin, P. (2017). Social and cultural dynamics: A study of change in major systems of art, truth, ethics, law and social relationships. Routledge.
write