Correctness Between Law and Morality - Research Paper Example

It is important to note that major differences between theories of justice often cause one to overlook the fact that they are based on a process of comparing an act or a law to a certain standard in order to determine whether it is legal. Exactly what these standards are created this deep dividing line between the positivists and the non-positivists and provide complicated, yet tense fuel for debate as to how one can establish whether there is not only a connection between law and morality but just how deep this connection runs and what implications it has for the way in which law is interpreted.

When one adds into the equation the stance that the law lays claim to correctness, a much vaster crevice of theory and possibility is opened, along with the possibility that it either strengthens or weakens considerably the argument for the connection between law and morals. Despite their major differences, positivists and non-positivists also share some common elements, which are relevant to the state in order to accentuate and understand on a deeper level their main conflicting facets. Firstly, both “seek to examine and justify the authority of law”1 and claim secondly that an unjust law does not carry with it an obligation to be obeyed.

Both positivists and non-positivists agree on these points, as well as understanding the importance of the rule of law.Let us commence with the basic concepts of the arguing sides, and build a deeper understanding on a gradual level towards the more specific concept of the claim to correctness. According to supporters of the link between law and morality, there is a moral basis upon which posited law is perched, which assigns to it the legally valid status which it claims. The belief that there can be objective knowledge of right and wrong is paramount to this line of thought.