Law and Society

van Schilfgaarde, Peter

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-01848-1_3

Peter van Schilfgaarde²

483 Accesses

Abstract

This Sect. 3.1 must be understood against the background of Sects. 1.2, 2.9 and 2.10.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 89.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 119.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Compare Arendt (1998), p. 9 and 178, who uses the expression “natality,” as opposed to “mortality.”
2.
In the present “Law and Economics” school the facts leading to this problem “… are sometimes summarized by saying that there is rivalry in the consumption of private goods” (Cooter and Ulen 2016, p. 103).
3.
This would be the first option, or so I understand, in the present “Law and Economics” school. See on this Sect. 2.7.
4.
In this vein Tamanaha (2001), p. 209 and 224.
5.
More on cohesion in Sect. 3.6.
6.
See about crossing the Rubicon by Julius Caesar: Beard (2016), pp. 286–287.
7.
More on good faith and fair dealing in Sect. 3.11. Netherlands law uses in this connection the concept of “reasonableness and fairness.” See Van Schilfgaarde (2015).
8.
“Copyright” is an example. But the use of the expression “moral rights” in this sphere is much wider.
9.
More on moral awareness in Sect. 3.3.
10.
See for the dilemma’s this may lead to: Dworkin (1977), p. 240 ff. in a piece called “Liberty and Moralism.”
11.
More observations on “awareness” can be found in Sects. 3.6 and 3.7.
12.
Arendt (1963), Eichmann in Jerusalem. See also Sect. 3.14 hereafter.
13.
To be downloaded via Google.
14.
See on ethical leadership the “Author’s Note” in Comey (2018), pp. ix–xii, on ethics and hypocrisy the Epilogue, pp. 275–277.
15.
Mentioned before in Sect. 2.4.
16.
Sections 3.9 and 3.10.
17.
To this list one can easily and truthfully add another non-exhaustive list: experience, causation, politics, social life, taste, money, and happiness. See on happiness Kant-Guyer p. 677. On Kant and money: Mertens (2017).
18.
See for a list of categories Kant-Guyer, p. 212. See also Kant-Guyer p. 9.
19.
Kant Guyer, pp. 354–365.
20.
“Causality” is listed, as part of the category “Causality and Dependence,” under the heading “Relation.”
21.
Kant-Guyer, p. 1.
22.
Kant-Guyer, p. 677.
23.
See for “hope” also Sect. 5.10 hereafter.
24.
Kant-Guyer, p. 585.
25.
Elsewhere, Kant-Guyer, p. 678: “speculative principles of reason.”
26.
See Sect. 1.3.
27.
See Sullivan (1989), p. xii.
28.
See for a short overview Kant-Guyer, pp. 20–28.
29.
See for imagination Sect. 5.9 hereafter.
30.
Compare Williams (1983), p. 37.
31.
This is different in Hegel’s philosophy, see Sect. 3.5.
32.
The mental and physical propensity to be guided by apps. This is inserted here in a Kantian effort to stay abreast in modern times.
33.
Emotions too. See Kant’s description of the three functions of practical reasoning as referred to in Sullivan (1989), p. 28.
34.
As mentioned in Sect. 3.2.
35.
“Wankelmut” in classic German. See for this much encompassing, “seeliche” expression the first line of van Eschenbach (1967): “Wenn Wankelmut beim Herzen wohnt.”
36.
Or “moral sense.”
37.
See further on “sense of justice” Sect. 3.9.
38.
See Murphy (1994). Kant uses the word “Rechtslehre,” rather than “Rechtsphilosophie.”
39.
Compare Murphy (1994), pp. 35–36.
40.
See further on the notion of Maxim or “rule” Sullivan (1989), p. 28.
41.
The “original wording” in some translations into English. But again: there are many different translations. See for instance Sullivan (1989), pp. 149–150, who presents the three formulas mentioned here in slightly different wording.
42.
Sullivan (1989), p. 149.
43.
See on this also Murphy (1994), pp. 41–42.
44.
See the first mentioned wording of the categorical imperative in Sect. 3.3.
45.
Compare Murphy (1994), pp. 23–26.
46.
See on this the text the passage in Kant’s Critique of Pure reason as cited in Murphy (1994), p. 27. A different, more precise translation of the original text can be found in Kant-Guyer, p. 540 (A 547/B575). The “Ought implies Can” thesis does not appear clearly in either translation.
47.
Compare Murphy (1994), pp. 34–37. See also Sullivan (1989), p. 51 f. and 121 ff.
48.
See for these quotes Murphy (1994), p. 94.
49.
Sullivan (1989), p. 121, bottom line. In English this would be: “Act dutifully out of duty.”
50.
See on this terminology and the competing meaning of Geschmack as Aestetics: Kant-Guyer p. 156, note 4 on that page, and p. 173.
51.
More on this and slightly different Sullivan (1989), p. 54 ff.
52.
Or “freedom of.”
53.
See on this Arendt (1951), Waldron (2016), p. 295 and 297, Salman and Claassen (2018), p. 570.
54.
More on religion in Sects. 5.6 and 5.7 hereafter.
55.
See on this in particular Williams (1983).
56.
Among them the publications known in English as “Religion within the Limits of Reason alone” (Die Religion innerhalb der Grenzen der blossen Vernunft, 1793/1794), “Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals,” (Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten, 1797), and “Perpetual Peace” (Zum ewigen Frieden, 1785).
57.
See for a further explanation Williams (1983), p. 41.
58.
Marcuse (1964).
59.
Marcuse (1964), p. 4.
60.
Marcuse (1964), p. 10.
61.
Marcuse (1964), p. 6.
62.
Marcuse (1964), p. 170 ff.
63.
Section 5.7.
64.
Taken from unpublished work of the little known and difficult to trace contemporary poet Bacchus Rietveld. This short poem is obviously inspired by a strophe in “Het huwelijk,” a poem of the Flemish poet Willem Elsschot (Verzen van Willem Elsschot), 1862–1960.
65.
Such as in the word “Vernunft.” In Hegel’s terminology this word has the meaning of “self-conscious Spirit” (selbstbewuster Geist) but at the same time as a capacity connected to actual reality (vorhandene Wirklichkeit). See Hegel (1820), p. 58, where Hegel poetically speaks of “die Vernunft als die Rose im Kreuze der Gegenwart,” the “Vernunft” as the “rose in the cross of the present.”
66.
See the foregoing foot note on the double meaning of “Vernunft.”
67.
Hegel (1820), p. 56. Possible translation: “What’s reasonable is real; and what’s real is reasonable.” In view of Hegel’s view on “nichtige” reality, a better translation is perhaps: “What can be seen in connection with reasonableness can be considered real; what can be seen in connection with reality [therefore not including “nichtige” reality] can be seen as reasonable.”
68.
Hegel (1820), p. 59. Usually translated as: “When philosophy paints its grey in grey, one form of life has become old, and by means of grey it cannot be rejuvenated, but only known; the owl of Minerva spreads its wings only with the falling of dusk.”
69.
See on wisdom also Sect. 5.4.
70.
See my comments on the expression “moral world” in Sect. 3.3 which seem to apply here too.
71.
Section 4.5.
72.
As explained in Sect. 5.9.
73.
In the same vein my comments in Sect. 1.2.
74.
In Sect. 1.3 on Hannah Arendt, in connection with the ideas of Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, and Marx. See also the passage on hierarchy in Sect. 3.3 on Morality in Kant’s philosophy.
75.
A mass grave of offered children was found in Peru in 2018, as public sources reveal.
76.
Or mere infanticide, Plutarch, Lycurgus: 16.1. Doubts have risen around his story. In a different version of the Spartan infanticide it is claimed that the Spartans used to leave the unwanted child in a mountain chasm, until it died.
77.
Genesis 22.
78.
Matthew 2:16.
79.
Recent studies reveal that no or very few children took part in the so-called “children’s crusade.”
80.
See Sect. 3.16.
81.
See Sect. 4.9.
82.
Including the public and private “networks” of people who use their influence to direct the development of laws and life. See on this use of the word “network”: Ferguson (2017), sparsim.
83.
Du contrat social ou Principes du droit politique (1762).
84.
See for earlier remarks on “cohesion” and “awareness” Sect. 1.2.
85.
Think of the “Me too” movement of the years 2017 and 2018.
86.
See further on respect and responsibility Sect. 3.8.
87.
See on “human condition” Sect. 1.3 and Arendt (1998).
88.
As mentioned in Sect. 1.2.
89.
See on “Law and economics” Sect. 2.7.
90.
Cooter and Ulen (2016), p. 81.
91.
Cooter and Ulen (2016), p. 76.
92.
As mentioned by Waldron, see before, Sect. 2.6.
93.
In Sect. 2.4.
94.
See on the Rule of Law Sect. 2.1.
95.
With further referral to Sect. 2.4.
96.
Ricoeur (2000), p. 5.
97.
Ricoeur (2000), p. 28. In this connection Ricoeur refers to article 1348 of the French civil code.
98.
Section 1.3, close to the end.
99.
Margalit (1996).
100.
Margalit (1996), p. 2.
101.
Rawls (1971). Margalit (1996), last chapter, called “Conclusion,” pp. 271–291.
102.
Margalit (1996), p. 281.
103.
Margalit (1996), p. 288. See for “story” p. 284 and 289.
104.
As explained at the end of Sect. 1.2 and repeatedly thereafter.
105.
Rawls (1971), p. 3.
106.
Rawls (1971), p. 136.
107.
Rawls (1971), p. 60 ff.
108.
Rawls (1971), p. 108 ff.
109.
Rawls (1971), p. 111.
110.
Ricoeur (2000), p. 8. Also: Ricoeur (2005), p. 8/9.
111.
Ricoeur (2000), p. 8, my interpretation of Ricoeur’s more intricate wording.
112.
Ricoeur (2000), p. 7.
113.
Ricoeur (2000), p. 131.
114.
Ricoeur (2000), p. 36 ff.
115.
See for instance Rawls (1971), p. 310 ff.
116.
Compare Rawls (1971), pp. 585–586 and 587, last sentence.
117.
Section 2.11 in particular.
118.
Rawls (1971), p. 7.
119.
Rawls (1971), p. 8, 147 and 245 ff.
120.
Rawls (1971), pp. 8–9. In Rawls’ view matters of criminal justice belong for the most part to partial compliance theory (Rawls 1971, p. 315).
121.
See Sirks and Mausen (2015) (Montpellier addresses), and Van Schilfgaarde (2015).
122.
See Sect. 2.10.
123.
See for “ultimate purpose” Sect. 2.3.
124.
In the publication mentioned called “law-linked justice.” See Sect. 2.11 of this treatise.
125.
As spoken of in Sect. 3.9.
126.
Discussed in Sect. 3.2.
127.
Declaration of Independence of 1776, second paragraph.
128.
Compare Dworkin (1977), p. 273, who makes an instructive distinction between “treatment as equals” and “the right to equal treatment.”
129.
Section 4.5.
130.
Arendt (1998), p. 175/176.
131.
Dworkin (2006), p. 112.
132.
“Moral Pluralism” is the title of Dworkin’s Chapter 4, which contains the just quoted sentence.
133.
See Sect. 2.1 on the rule of law.
134.
Exodus 20, 1–17.
135.
See Sect. 4.3 for the more advanced view that rights contain obligations.
136.
As an “inviolable and sacred” personal right.
137.
See Waldron (2016), pp. 195–245 for a well-documented discussion. His piece ends with the statement that “an additional layer of final review by courts adds little to [the ordinary legislative procedures] except a rather insulting form of disenfranchisement and a legalistic obfuscation of the moral issues at stake in our disagreements about rights” (p. 244).
138.
See Arendt (1963), Eichmann in Jerusalem, also referred to in Sect. 3.2.
139.
No punishment without a law.
140.
The law is hard but that’s the law as it is written. Statement ascribed to the Roman jurist Ulpianus (107–228).
141.
Literally: father of the family.
142.
Dutch law still knows the concept of the “goed huisvader,” the good “pater familias.”
143.
469-399 B.C.
144.
106-43 B.C.
145.
Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.
146.
More on power in Sect. 5.2.
147.
Crace (2013). Most likely the story is set in the period between 1709 and 1869, the period of the “enclosure acts,” parliamentary acts requiring private land to be fenced off from common grounds.
148.
DeWitt (2011). A movie after the novel, under the direction of the French producer Jacques Aduard, showing a slightly different approach, was released in 2018.
149.
Section 1.2.

References

Arendt H (1951) The origins of totalitarianism. Schocken Books, New York
Google Scholar
Arendt H (1963) Eichmann in Jerusalem, a report on the banality of evil, first printing New York 1963, revised edition London Penguin books, 2006
Google Scholar
Arendt H (1998) The human condition, Original edition, 2nd edn. Chicago Press
Google Scholar
Beard M (2016) SPQR, a history of ancient Rome. Profile Books, London
Google Scholar
Comey J (2018) A higher loyalty. Flatiron Books, New York
Google Scholar
Cooter R, Ulen T (2016) Law and economics, 6th edn. Pearson (Addison-Wesley)
Google Scholar
Crace J (2013) Harvest. Picador, London
Google Scholar
De Waal F (2006) Primates and philosophers, how morality evolved. Princeton University Press
Google Scholar
DeWitt P (2011) The sisters brothers. Granta Publications, London
Google Scholar
Dworkin R (1977) Taking rights seriously. Harvard University Press
Google Scholar
Dworkin R (2006) Justice in Robes. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press
Google Scholar
Ferguson N (2017) The square and the tower. Alan Lane
Google Scholar
Hegel GWF (1820) Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts, mit einer Einleitung herausgegeben von Bernhard Lakebrink. Reclam, Stuttgart, 1970
Google Scholar
Marcuse H (1964) One-dimensional man. Beacon Press
Google Scholar
Margalit A (1996) The decent society (trans: Hebrew by Naomi Goldblum). Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Google Scholar
McKendrick E (2017) Coming to terms with good faith. In: Trust and good faith across borders, Liber Amicorum Prof. Mr. S.C.J.J. Kortmann, Wolters Kluwer
Google Scholar
McMahon C (2016) Reasonableness and fairness: a historical theory. Cambridge University Press
Google Scholar
Mertens T (2017) ‘Money, Money, Money …’ Some reflections on Kant and money. In: Trust and good faith across borders, Liber Amicorum Prof. Mr. S.C.J.J. Kortmann, Wolters Kluwer
Google Scholar
Murphy JG (1994) Kant: the philosophy of right, First published 1970. Reproduced as a Rose Edition, Mercer University Press, Macon, Georgia
Google Scholar
Rawls J (1971) A theory of justice, Revised edn. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Ricoeur P (2000) The just (trans: Pellauer D). University of Chicago Press. ‘Le juste’ is the title of the original publication in French, Éditions Esprit, 1995
Google Scholar
Ricoeur P (2005) Le juste, la justice et son échec, L’Herne, Paris
Google Scholar
Salman YA, Claassen R (2018) From ownership to access. A philosophical perspective on the rise of access-based consumption. In: Ars Aequi 2018, afl. 07/08, pp 566–576
Google Scholar
Sirks B, Mausen Y (2015) Aequitas Équité Equity, Actes de colloque. Faculté de droit et de science politique de Montpellier, Montpellier
Google Scholar
Sullivan RJ (1989) Immanuel Kant’s moral theory. Cambridge University Press
Google Scholar
Van Schilfgaarde P (2015) Equity in the laws of The Netherlands. In: Aequitas, Équité, Equity. Actes de colloque, Faculté de droit et de science politique de Montpellier, Montpellier, pp 41–51
Google Scholar
von Eschenbach W (1967) Parzival, eine Auswahl, Reclam, Stuttgart, 1967. Original text written around 1200
Google Scholar
Waldron J (2016) Political political theory, essays on institutions. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Google Scholar
Williams HL (1983) Kant’s political philosophy. St. Martin’s Press, Inc., New York
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

The Hague, The Netherlands
Peter van Schilfgaarde

Authors

Peter van Schilfgaarde
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

van Schilfgaarde, P. (2019). Law and Society. In: Law and Life. Why Law?. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01848-1_3

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01848-1_3
Published: 26 March 2019
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-01847-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-01848-1
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics