» » Making Men Moral: Civil Liberties and Public Morality (Clarendon Paperbacks)
hotellemcasadeicervia.it
ePub 1857 kb. | Fb2 1653 kb. | DJVU: 1470 kb.
Other

Making Men Moral: Civil Liberties and Public Morality (Clarendon Paperbacks) epub ebook

by Robert P. George

Making Men Moral: Civil Liberties and Public Morality (Clarendon Paperbacks) epub ebook

Author: Robert P. George
Category: Social Sciences
Language: English
Publisher: Clarendon Press (May 25, 1995)
Pages: 256 pages
ISBN: 0198260245
ISBN13: 978-0198260240
Rating: 4.8
Votes: 305
Other formats: lrf mobi lrf lit


Making Men Moral is a strong defense of morals laws against arguments critical of traditional jurisprudence by. .The first sentence in the book says that Law cannot make men moral by itself. Law cannot force conformity of one's internal attitude.

Making Men Moral is a strong defense of morals laws against arguments critical of traditional jurisprudence by contemporary liberal legal scholars contains much erudition and wisdom worthy of study and reflection. -Modern Age. "There is much to praise in George's book. This book is clear, incisive, and well argued. However, law is not an irrelevant part in this creating a more moral community.

Be like the sun for grace and mercy. 81 MB·1,150 Downloads·New!. The Morality of Freedom (Clarendon Paperbacks). Be like the night to cover others' faults. Be like running water for generosity. Be like death for rage and anger. Be like the Earth for modesty. 02 MB·96 Downloads·New! Ranging over central issues of morals and politics and the nature of freedom and authority. Soil-structure interaction : the real behaviour of structures. 02 MB·14,413 Downloads·New!

Here Robert P. George defends the traditional justification of morals legislation against criticisms advanced by.George closes with a sketch of a "pluralistic perfectionist" theory of civil liberties and public morality, showing that it is fully compatible with a defense of morals legislation.

Here Robert P. George defends the traditional justification of morals legislation against criticisms advanced by leading liberal theorists. He argues that such legislation can play a legitimate role in maintaining a moral environment conducive to virtue and inhospitable to at least some forms of vice. Making Men Moral will interest legal scholars and political theorists as well as theologians and philosophers focusing on questions of social justice and political morality.

Making Men Moral book.

This book is a strong response to the widely held view that morality as such cannot be enforced by the law.

book by Robert P. George. Contemporary liberal thinkers commonly suppose that there is something in principle unjust about the legal prohibition of putatively victimless crimes. This book is a strong response to the widely held view that morality as such cannot be enforced by the law. According to Prof. George, society may legitimately seek to "make men moral" as long as the moral sentiment expressed is legitimate.

Contemporary liberal thinkers commonly suppose that there is something in principle unjust about the legal prohibition of putatively victimless crimes. Here Robert P. Among the liberal critics of morals legislation whose views George considers are Ronald Dworkin, Jeremy Waldron, David .

Against the prevailing liberal view, Robert P. George defends the . George shows that a defence of morals legislation is fully compatible with a & perfectionist' political theory of civil liberties and public morality. George defends the proposition that & laws' can play a legitimate, if subsidiary, role in preserving the & ecology' of the cultural environment in which people make the morally significant choices by which they form their characters and influence, for good or ill, the moral lives of others.

Quick download ebook Making Men Moral for tablet - Free Books Online. Find and Load Ebook Making Men Moral.

Contemporary liberal thinkers commonly suppose that there is something in principle unjust about the legal prohibition of putatively victimless crimes. Here Robert P. George defends the traditional justification of morals legislation against criticisms advanced by leading liberal theorists. He argues that such legislation can play a legitimate role in maintaining a moral environment conducive to virtue and inhospitable to at least some forms of vice. Among the liberal critics of morals legislation whose views George considers are Ronald Dworkin, Jeremy Waldron, David A.J. Richards, and Joseph Raz. He also considers the influential modern justification for morals legislation offered by Patrick Devlin as an alternative to the traditional approach. George closes with a sketch of a "pluralistic perfectionist" theory of civil liberties and public morality, showing that it is fully compatible with a defense of morals legislation. Making Men Moral will interest legal scholars and political theorists as well as theologians and philosophers focusing on questions of social justice and political morality.
Reviews (6)
Dorilune
Professor George provides a rigorous analysis of the liberal theory of law in contrast to a natural law or virtue approach to law. The first sentence in the book says that Law cannot make men moral by itself. Law cannot force conformity of one's internal attitude. However, law is not an irrelevant part in this creating a more moral community. Professor George concedes that not every moral law can be implemented, but in principle they can be permissible. However, just because a law is moral in principle in terms to preventing certain behaviors that damage a person's character and the moral ecology of a community, doesn't mean the law should be implemented. He agrees that a prudential judgment needs to be done before actually implementing the law. If a law will give too much power to the government, or will cause more harm to the greater society than the law should not be implemented.

Agree or disagree the arguments of Professor George, they are well articulated, very powerful, and must be responded to by those of the Millian liberal theory of law. His general point that private vice doesn't remain private forever, especially when practiced by wide number of people, does become of public interest. As Americans we should start overcoming our individualistic philosophy and think more in terms of what is the common good of the community. Our individual choices have greater effect than we know, especially when taken in large number. What these vices are, are up for debate and George makes this abundantly clear. A true public philosophy engages in the nature of the good and the character of its people. To not care about the well-being of one's community will eventually lead to a disintegration of communities on the whole.

In summary, George's books is worth the time but you need to read it carefully and if one is not familiar with philosophy, in particular analytic philosophy of law then this may be more difficult for you.

Frey
Regardless of what your personal belief system holds this book is an excellent read because it is thought provoking no matter what side of the fence your beliefs sit. The reason everyone should read this book is because there is sound explanation for the reasons George believes as he does.
Moral standards have been around since the days of the Roman Empire and it is interesting to see how man views fairness and how if you were to have to choose laws for everyone to follow without any background or knowledge we would all choose that which is globally fair for all.

Peles
This book is a strong response to the widely held view that morality as such cannot be enforced by the law. According to Prof. George, society may legitimately seek to "make men moral" as long as the moral sentiment expressed is legitimate. The last qualification is important, because it does set a limit on how far the law may go in interfering with personal autonomy. Therefore, we can say that it is premised on a natural law foundation, which is foreign to most people today. Most of the arguments are made in the course of criticizing the opposing views of some heavyweight philosophers like Ronald Dworkin, John Rawls, and Joseph Raz. Especially good is a chapter on the famous debate between H.L.A. Hart and Patrick Devlin. Though George's position is closer to that of Devlin, he does a good job explaining how Devlin's views are in many ways deficient and incompatible with a free society. This is a fine book no matter what your political views, though it does help to have a background in political and moral philosophy to fully grasp the arguments.

Gralsa
In this relatively short work, conservative thinker Robert P. George outlines his view of what should be the structure of a just and well-ordered society.

George argues in this book the state has a strong role to enforce morality, particularly in the private as well as the public sphere. As well as stopping things such as theft, fraud and murder, the state in George's view should also regulate matters such as pornography, homosexuality and deviant sexual behaviour. In his view, the state has a legitimate interest in protecting institutions such as the nuclear heterosexual family against inroads from proponents of gay rights or irregular family structures.

To his credit George is an intelligent man who thinks about what he says. The main weakness of the book is very often it reads like a veiled defence of the conservative fundamentalist Catholic religion George follows (or at least claims to follow), rather than being a true attempt to work out a rational order for society that all can agree on. Ultimately by premising a lot of his work on natural law arguments derived from the teaching of the church, George (along with other natural lawyers and Catholic writers like Finnis, Gricez and Boyle) seem to simply offer a sectarian view of the world few outside of traditionalist or fundamentalist religious circles would accept. Even an evangelical Protestant or Pentecostal would stop at the Catholic church, and an agnostic or atheist at the mention of religion.

Sadly while George offers some good arguments for regulating activities like pornography and prostitution to protect society's moral fabric, he fails to make the case for the rigid legal and moral code he obviously wants society to follow. To paraphrase Mill it is better for society to hear the view it doesn't want to hear, and the justification for limiting someone's freedom has to lie on those seeking to limit it. Porn or prostitution may be harmful but there is little evidence to suggest banning either outright would help reduce other evils that might follow in its wake, as the War on Drugs has shown. George and the other natural lawyers need to make a less sectarian appeal to the common good and rationality to make their case compelling.

Unfortunately too many Catholics in the hierarchy and the right-wing find George's arguments to be a great vehicle to push a far-right wing, polarised culture war agenda. I much prefer Pope Francis's fresh proclamation of a merciful Gospel to the miserable, pharisaical 'Gospel' of Robbie George and his ilk.

2016-2020 © www.hotellemcasadeicervia.it
All rights reserved