Ronald Dworkin and One of His Leading Theories is the Theory of Integrity - Essay Example

Dworkin and the Theory of Integrity How does Dworkin derive his theory of integrity? Is integrity a virtue of law? Does it serve the ends of justice? Introduction Ronald Dworkin is an American philosopher and legal expert who was born in 1931 and currently holds several eminent positions in the legal as well as teaching professions (Wikipedia, 2006). His contributions to the field of jurisprudence, the philosophy of law and political ideology have been widely acclaimed as well as opposed (Burgess-Jackson, 1998). One of his leading theories is the theory of integrity as it applies to law and the participants in the legal system and an understanding of this philosophy is important for any student of social science, history, politics or law. Historically speaking, Dworkin’s ideas come from his partial opposition to the concepts presented by Hart (Burgess-Jackson, 1998). The disagreement is partial because Dworkin does not agree with Hart that the legal system is completely dependent upon preset rules. Dworkin sees the legal system as being based on rules but also notes the importance of principles which include things like cultural norms, government policies and the zeitgeist (Doubt, 1998). Rules apply exclusively to a particular case or situation and can not have partial application; however, principles can be applied partially. Therefore, principles can also be in conflict which often leads to different decisions from different judges. Of course in such scenarios where principles are in conflict, the weight of each principle can act as a counter force to the other and the strongest one often carries the day. On the other hand, if both the applicable principles are strong then a compromise must be made between them. This balancing will lead to a final ethical decision which would be the correct answer for the case in question (Doubt, 1998). Since the principles would come from the society which made the laws in the first place, the verdict would therefore be based on the dictates of society. Integrity This is where the idea of integrity comes in to play and Dworkin suggests two types of integrities which must be present. The first is legislative integrity which means that the people making the laws and those who are handing out justice must have integrity in the production of the laws. Further, the creation of all laws in a society must have their foundations in the principles of the society. The second integrity is the judicial integrity which is particular to the judges deciding over cases by interpreting the laws (Dworkin, 2002). Here, if they act in consistent accordance with the principles then they have acted with judicial integrity. Integrity is certainly a virtue for those who create and enforce the law as well as those who act as judges. The concept of integrity can be simplified if it is seen as consistent application of the law and a lack of ambiguity in wordings of the law which makes law it self be rational. Of course, the principles of a society may change with time as in the legalisation of alcohol, acceptance of drugs, prostitution and abortion but that change represents a chance in the ideals of society not in any one person or law. Thus society itself can be seen as an individual body where the collective decisions made by the society can affect laws. However, society must be honest with itself and deal with the various members of the body with integrity. A society according to Dworkin is made up of its members, yet every member is an individual who is disconnected from society more than he/she is connected to it. Dworkin demands that the decisions made by society for all its members regarding the laws of the land must be dependent on honesty and integrity which leads to the idea of society speaking with one voice (Dworkin, 2002). In all likelihood, a society will have power over an individual but to exercise that power rightfully Dworkin wants the society to justify itself (as powerful and rightfully controlling) by exhibiting the virtues of legal integrity and equality for all of its members. Dworkin’s idea of speaking with one voice is more than consistent application of the law since it includes the idea that society will also give the equality of respect to all its members in legal terms (Dworkin, 2002). Integrity therefore, is a virtue for men, for judges and by relation, of law. If the men who make the laws are ethical and have integrity while the judges who enforce or interpret the laws have integrity then the laws which are created, upheld and enforced will also have integrity as an added virtue. Of course this is a very idealistic viewpoint but Dworkin does not seem to suggest an overnight change and application of integrity in the legal systems of the world (Wolfe, 1994). Rather, what he appears to be looking for is personal integrity which will eventually lead to integrity being a part of every aspect of the overall society. Equality Finally, the idea of equality is discussed by Dworkin as a part of his moral and legal philosophy. The idea itself has been discussed by many philosophers and thinkers and just like them, Dworkin has given his own interpretation of equality where he suggests that human beings are to be held responsible for their actions and the choices which they make therefore a plea for bad choices in life should not affect the equality of justice. Secondly, the natural gifts of intelligence, wisdom, strength, charisma etc. are arbitrary in relation to the influence of morality and these should have no bearing on how resources are divided in an egalitarian society (Dworkin, 2002). The respect awarded to one person by the law should be the same as it is given to any other person who appears before the law. Additionally, the concern shown by law for the life of one individual should be the same as the other and the structure of the society in terms of wealth, resources, abilities or position of the individual should have no bearing on how they are treated by the law. Clearly, with this idea of equality and equal treatment, Dworkin comes across as being someone who would be as tough on those who commit white collar crime as those who commit burglaries. Conclusion While there may be those who disagree with moral or economic ideas for society as presented by Dworkin, I completely agree with his ideas about the value of integrity in our society as well as the legal profession. I believe that Justice is an end in itself and it is something society must work towards both in action and words. Dworkin’s theory of integrity certainly helps a society see where it is going in terms of being honest to its members and also allows judges a measure of testing their own valuations and judgements on the scale of integrity. This is also supported by his idea of a society where the equality of respect exists. It may be impossible if not a foolish experiment to try and create a society where every resource could be distributed in equal terms, but the respect from the law is certainly on of the resources which can be given out in equal quantities to everyone who appears before the law. Dworkin is right in suggesting that to be an essential part of the legal system along with his ideas of integrity based application of principles. I certainly hope that the future legal systems of the world take Dworkin’s words very seriously. Works Cited Wolfe, C. “Liberalism and paternalism: A critique of Ronald Dworkin.” Review of Politics 56.4 (1994): 615-640. Doubt, K. “Dworkins Moral Hermeneutics and Sociological Theory.” Social Science Journal 35.3 (1998): 333-246. Wikipedia. “Ronald Dworkin” Wikipeida.org. 2006. Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia. 9 May. 2006 Burgess-Jackson, K. “Teaching Legal Theory with Venn Diagrams.” Metaphilosophy 29.3 (1998): 159-178. Dworkin, R. Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality. Harvard University Press. 2002. Word Count: 1,338 Read More