Comment

Comment on If you are ever feeling like what you are doing is meaningless, remember that there are American lawyers and judges who have spent many years studying US constitutional law.

BilboBargains@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

Why do people talk about law as if it has any sort of substance? If all the books were burnt we would only be able to faithfully reproduce the science books, everything else is just some stuff we made up.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Rockbear@feddit.dk ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
In 1241 the danish king signed the first major law of the land. The law itself is pretty much outdated, but its preamble is still a very useful explanation of ‘why laws?’

Allow me to quote it fully and then mark a few bits that I consider important in 2025.

With law shall the country be built but if all men were content with what is theirs and let others enjoy the same right, there would be no need for a law. But no law is as good as the truth, but if one wonders what the truth is, then shall the law show the truth. If the land had no law, then he would have the most who could grab the most by force… The law must be honest, just, reasonable and according to the ways of the people. It must meet their needs and speak plainly, so that all men may know and understand, what the law is. It is not to be made in any man’s favor, but for the needs of all them who live in the land. No man shall judge contrary to the law, which the king has given and the country chosen. […] neither shall he [the king] take it back without the will of the people.

source
- BilboBargains@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  That’s an interesting origin story. I suspect these ideas came about and came to possess a utility as larger societies formed. Nobody needs to be told that murder and stealing are wrong, we know it instinctively. It has been shown that primates understand this concept generally.
  
  One problem with large societies is that customs becomes entrenched over time. We keep following the same rules and forget where they came from, we mistake the menu for the food. We cannot turn to a naturalistic solution to this problem, where everything is eating everything else because that amounts to fascism. Instead we must settle for a kludge where rich people get a different type of justice than do the poor, sentencing is more punitive before lunch and many other idiosyncrasies. My point is, I don’t want to forget that a menu is just a menu. Some things will always be true and the law is not one of those things.
  
  source