Legal theory Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

Legal theory - Essay Example It is hence a typically Platonic argument.2 Nussbaum firmly claims that a good judge appreciates the poetics of justice. Essentially, the argument of Nussbaum implies that a good judge fulfils his/her professional existence most wholly when s/he is equipped to defend and oppose, and be condemned or repealed, in seeking justice. The clash between the natural law and positivism should be very definite if a judge is to depend on the notion of poetic justice to the core of fair dealing. The judge should make a decision: does this positivistic law go against the heart of my responsibility to humanity and to self? The endeavour is exceptionally challenging. To society it is normally baffling. That challenge is not yet met, albeit the insistent demand by judges for justice and rationality. The objective of this essay is to discuss the argument of Nussbaum in light of the two novels of William Shakespeare, namely, Measure for Measure and The Merchant of Venice. The discussion will revolve ar ound the specific themes of law and morality: Christianity, common law, and the debate of natural law and positivism. ... The Duke cautions Angelo that individual morality should be enacted freely or in public3: Heaven doth with us as we with torches do, Not light them for themselves; for if our virtues Did not go forth of us, ‘twere all alike As if we had them not.4 The above statement is reminiscent of a passage in Matthew 5:15-6, the Sermon on the Mount: â€Å"Nether do men light a candel, and put it vnder a bushel, but on a candelsticke & it giueth light vnto all that are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may se your good workes, & glorifie your Father which is in heauen.†5 The character of Angelo is recognised for his self-control and accuracy, although illustrations of him lean more on apathy than virtuosity. The glorified personal moral principles of Angelo are now subjected to criticism in his recently assigned public position. The conflict between the concept of natural justice and positivistic law, at this point, came in Angelo’s encounter with Isa bella. Isabella speaks up for mercy on the basis of understanding of one’s immorality and emulation of Christ’s life. Unluckily, Angelo is not convinced. Insincerity may be criticised by the passage ‘judge not’, yet it is not banned by the law, an argument Angelo has already stated earlier in the novel.6 Isabella justifies her argument when she implores Angelo to think about the judgement of God: â€Å"How would you be, /If He, which is the top of judgment, should/ But judge you as you are?†7 The allusion of the overgenerous mercy of Christ requires that the ‘human’ or deficient Angelo ought not to give judgment on other mortal beings, a claim that appears to hark back Schleitheim Confession’s article 68: The sword is ordained of God outside the perfection of