We approach law with deep ambivalence. On the one hand, we take immense pride in living under the rule of law. On the other hand, we often catch ourselves lamenting the existence of law. When we lament the existence of law, we are not just saying that there is too much of it. We are not just complaining about the amount of law. Rather, our complaint goes to the very nature of law itself. We complain that its rules are constraining, (...) that its generality ignores the particularity of each situation, that its coercive force rides roughshod over our autonomy, and the list goes on. However, notwithstanding the frustration with law, it is not that we want to get rid of it. This paper seeks to express and explain our conflicting sentiments about law – why we sometimes view law as a monumental moral achievement and why we are sometimes so frustrated with it. The answer, as this paper will argue, lies in the nature of norms. The value and limit of law is traceable to the value and limit of norms. Kierkegaard helps us see that. This paper will argue that our ambivalence about law mirrors Kierkegaard’s ambivalence about ethics. (shrink)

This paper argues that the wrong of slavery lies in the denial of the good of law to the slave. Defending this proposition will require the positing of three related claims: (i) that law is good, (ii) that the good of law is denied to the slave, and (iii) that the denial is wrong. This paper will defend the main proposition by defending its three constituent claims. On claim (i), the paper will relate the form of law to the formation (...) of freedom. On claim (ii), the paper will relate law’s objectivity to legal subjectivity. On claim (iii), the paper will relate the state of nature to the state of civil society. (shrink)

How does one lead a life of law, love, and freedom? This inquiry has very deep roots in the Judeo-Christian tradition. Indeed, the divergent answers to this inquiry mark the transition from Judeo to Christian. This book returns to those roots to trace the twists and turns that these ideas have taken as they move from the sacred to the secular. It relates our most important mode of social organization, law, to two of our most cherished values, love and freedom. (...) In this book, Joshua Neoh sketches the moral vision that underlies our modern legal order and traces our secular legal ideas to their theological origins. Law, Love, and Freedom brings together a diverse cast of characters, including Paul and Luther, Augustine and Aquinas, monks and Gnostics, and constitutionalists and anarchists. This book is valuable to any lawyers, philosophers, theologians and historians, who are interested in law as a humanistic discipline. (shrink)

It certainly grabs one’s attention when a book’s criticism of Finnis is that he is too liberal on matters of religion. But that is not the only reason that jurisprudes should pay attention to Harri...