Martin Luther King, Jr. pointed to natural law as higher law. He argued that morality must inform our understanding of when a law was just, or unjust. By contrast Oliver Wendell Holmes seems to suggest that the law is defined by the punishment a “bad” person might receive that changes their behavior. While acknowledging that the law was the repository of our moral life, he also suggested that to understand what the law actually was, we need to look at it instead from the perspective of someone without morals. Since a judge makes the law, the law is man made. Who has the better argument? How are there views different? Are there aspects that are similar? Are these views compatible, or are they invariably at odds with each other?
They must be 3-4 pages in length, double spaced, with 1.25 inch margins on all sides, and a normal 12 point font (Times New Roman or equivalent); this will amount to about 1000 words.
Paper Instructions.
Your paper should have a title, and your name, and the date submitted. Also indicate it is for POLI 276. Please also include page numbers at the bottom of the pages, and a word count at the top of the first page. You do not need to have a title page.
Please also provide a page of works cited. You can merely copy them from the syllabus – it is good to get into the habit of substantiating your claims.
