Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Lon Fuller argued that law possesses an internal morality—procedural fairness, generality, publicity—without which it cannot function as law.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Historically effective legal systems have lacked Fuller's procedural virtues—secret laws, retroactive justice, and ad hoc rules functioned as law.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Fuller conflates 'functional law' with 'legitimate law'; oppressive systems can meet procedural standards while remaining deeply unjust morally.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Defining morality into law's concept begs the question against legal positivists who argue legality and morality are conceptually separable.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Systems lacking procedural fairness and publicity enable arbitrary power, making them functionally indistinguishable from non-legal coercion.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Law requires subjects to modify behavior based on rules; opaque or retroactive laws cannot rationally guide conduct, defeating law's purpose.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Even unjust legal systems (apartheid, Nazi law) maintained internal procedural consistency, suggesting morality constraints are inherent to legality.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.