Law V. Justice

5 Pages 1172 Words

Law v. Justice
Throughout the history of man society has defined itself in terms of law and the order law creates. There has, however, always been the notion that laws are a form of justice, and a means of just governance. It is the combination of both law and justice that leads to the social framework we take for granted today.
Law has always been the agreed upon rules by which a society abides. While opinions upon whether or not a law is right will vary, there is a general consensus in the just nature of laws. If this consensus is not met, the law is repealed, as was shown in the United States during prohibition. The difficulty here resides in a population with desires that are not just, and laws that reflect that.
Justice, on the other hand, is a very abstract concept. Like law, it is a form of social order derived from a mandate from the masses. There is no actual correct definition of justice, but rather it is an agreed upon way of behaving. It means to be fair and true to each other, and to let personal politics stay out of the way of what is truly best for the society as a whole. This is a wonderful theory, but seems to be slightly more difficult when applied to a society.
It is the struggle between law, justice, and social order that has led to many of the conflicts of mankind. The current situation in the United States war against terrorism is based on our laws being broken and our social order up heaved by those who believe they are acting justly. It is precisely for this reason that justice cannot be defined and that agreed upon laws and social stipulations must be held in place. If a society were given over to allowing justice to be a personal matter, there would be, for the most part, a state of anarchy.
The Oresteia is full of examples of justice. There is a basic social morality that is derived from a general consensus regarding whether or not it is appropriate to kill someone. A murder must be justified by eith...