Alonzo Fyfe

I would like to offer an idea on the relationship between morality and law. This is really an outline of an idea that I cover in more detail in Part XVII of a series of posts I am writing, EThics Without God: A Personal Journey

There are two ways of getting people to act in ways that are in harmony with everybody else.

The first way is to impose internal constraints -- the actual desires of other people. This is most easily done with children, where 'moral education' (telling children that they ought to play nice, ought not take things that do not belong to them, ought to tell the truth, ought not to hurt other people) eventually influences their desires -- their likes and dislikes. A person who does not WANT to lie will not do so even when they can get away with it. A person with an AVERSION to taking things that belong to others will leave other people's property alone even when they can take it and get away with it.

But 'moral education' does not always work -- and some people come away without the desires that allow them to live in harmony with others. Against these people, we have a second method of regulating behavior. We say, "You may not have acquired an aversion to taking things that belong to others that you should have acquired. But you sure have an aversion to the things that we will do to you if we catch you taking something."

The method of creating the best internal constraints is the method of morality. The method of creating the best external constraints is the method of the criminal law.

This is what I meant when I said that, "The criminal law should not punish people for anything that is not wrong." The only things that should be punishable are those things that a person with good desires would not do.

But, not everything that is wrong should be made illegal -- mostly because the law is a large and unwieldy weapon poorly suited for regulating minor transgressions. It should only be used against those who commit serious wrongs, or those whose wrongs suggest they fall significantly short of having the desires and aversions that a good person would have. Shoplifting even an inexpensive pack of gun from the store is wrong because a person who would take it shows she does not have the aversion to taking things belonging to others that a good person would have.

In summary:

Our first line of defense against the harms that others may inflict on us is morality -- a set of institutions that cause others to have aversions to doing the things that would hurt us.

Our second line of defense against the harms that others may inflict on us is criminal law -- threatening people that if they do want to hurt us, they will not want what we will do to them as a result.

There is an essential link between morality and law.