THANKS SISYPHUS 55 for animating and narrating parts of this video!! check out his channel here:
do immoral laws lose their legal character? or can legality be separate from morality? i discuss the debate between natural law and legal positivism by examining the nasty regime and a specific case within it.
✧･ﾟ: *✧･ﾟ:* i’d love to hear what you have to say *:･ﾟ✧*:･ﾟ✧
TIMESTAMPS:
0:00 natural law
1:18 legal positivism
3:55 the central question
5:13 the grudge informer case
6:21 radbruch & kelsen
9:52 hart-fuller debate
18:54 is anglo-america any better?
28:02 outro
★・・・・・★・・・・・★
If you want extra ways to support my channel and get more content, check out my PATREON: patreon.com/oliSUNvia
socials:
,, instagram: @olisunvia
,, tiktok: @olisunvia (v lame pls don’t judge)
,, spotify: liv sun
FOR BUSINESS INQUIRIES:
olisunvia@nebula.tv
★・・・・・★・・・・・★
SOURCES:
Benson, C. & Fink, J. (2012). “New Perspectives on Nazi Law.”
Benson, C. & Fink, J. (2012). “Legal Oughts, Normative Transmission
and the Nazi Use of Analogy.” DOI: 10.5235/Jurisprudence.3.2.445
Critch, R. (2012). “Positivism and Relativism in Post-War Jurisprudence.” DOI: 10.5235/Jurisprudence.3.2.341
Fraser, D. (2012). “Evil Law, Evil Lawyers? From theJustice Case
to the Torture Memo.” DOI: 10.5235/Jurisprudence.3.2.391
Haldemann, F. (2005). “Gustav Radbruch vs. Hans Kelsen: A Debate on Nazi Law.”
Pauer-Studer. (2012). “Law and Morality under Evil Conditions
The SS Judge Fonrad Morgen.” DOI: 10.5235/Jurisprudence.3.2.367
MUSIC:
Chopin: Nocturne Op.48 No.1
Chopin: Nocturne in C sharp minor No. 20
Satie: Gnossienne No. 1
Satie: Gnossienne No. 2
tags: germany, evil, immoral, morality, legal theory, moral theory, law and morality, hart fuller debate, holocaust, world war 2, world war II, WWII, united nations, UN,corruption, legal system, supreme court, justice, america, sisyphus 55, video essay, commentary, philosophy, legal philosophy, noam chomsky, torture memos, war on terror, afghanistan war, laws, lawyer, nuremberg trials, shanspeare, jordan theresa, cj the x, tiffany ferg, alice cappelle, contrapoints, philosophy tube, madisyn brown, chad chad, tee noir, noah samsen, fd signifer, foreign man in a foreign land, khadija mbowe, T1J
Watch more new videos about Law | Synthesized by Mindovermetal English
big thank you to my patreons! (who i so stupidly forgot to acknowledge in the actual video):
(ง︡'-'︠)ง
Aidan Bozeman
Alan Cisneros
beanu
Benjamin Walsh
bleech
Calob Humble
CDubb
Davis Tran
Deepto Chatterjee
Dhruv Singhal
Diego
embarajas
Fckle
Foreign Man in a Foreign Land
GeW
Guilherme Goncalves
Haakon
hairy socks
Henry Adams
Jacob McMillan
JakeForHire
Jeanie Lee
Jesse
Jonathan von Schroeder
Josh Hunt
Jun
Justin Raper
Kian Nahad
L E E
Lawra Clark
Lorenzo Villegas
maggie
Mason Motley
Michelle Jia
murkymorals
Name
O.H.B.
OkaySureWhyNot
Pbat1099
Robert Castro
Sabrina Fiore
Samantha Mandel
Sarah Karen
Simon
Soladoccitannia
Solomon Khan
Sreenivas Vasamsetti
Tim
Tim Butler
Viljami Valldén
WB
Theres a scene in Silicone Valley that this evokes for me. Theres a tech competition and each presenter keeps framing their miniature breakthrough as Vital To Humanity. Its all very Elon 😂😂
quiet you commie
A Hidden Life by Terrence Malick touches on this subject. One of the best war movies made.
Post humanist libertarian-Marxism and anarcho-communism! No nature only environment.
If you are in a democratic nation then of course law should be moral as it is made by the people for the people. If you follow law simply for the fact that it is law then you are a fool and a puppet. If however you are in a dictatorship like nazi Germany I believe it is entirely just for you to follow laws that you know are unjust as you may be putting yourself at risk.
epic
have you been hitting the gym lately?
In terms of law vs morality, there is a spiral to be had on both ends
Best duo on YouTube
only baddies remember when we had to write an essay on this for the philosophy class i definitely dropped
it's kind of dystopian that you have to use code words for such an important topic
I love your channel! this reminds me so much of how complex humans really are, and how all of this is just the mere surface. I know that is already a huge part of philosophy but this video has been the most thought-provoking thing i have seen in a very long time. well done 🙂
is there any theory intent on repercussions for those who make the so called unjust laws? in the story of the nasty lady, where’s the repercussions for the legislator who made it legal to unalive someone for criticizing a man? the judge who ruled on it? the officers who enforced it? why is all the blame on the civilian who has absolute zero power in the situation? I know in this case she could’ve just not reported it but wouldn’t she then be a conspirator in that so called crime? then again asking lawyers and law students to hold themselves accountable for anything is an impossibility lol
we did a debate in school like a week ago, I could have used some of this points T_T
great video btw
25:51 lol the CIA out here l
I wrote a really long thesis here to support this but lemme just shorten it to the conclusion.
I think morals are temporal social constructs.
I believe Laws are from a person's or a people's morals so they are natural by design and they should be constructed in a way to encourage/give room to refinement and if they are so then we as a people should be Legal Positivists, since it will be through the law that we make unjust laws just, hope that makes sense.
Aw shucks, you're finally gonna make me question the Nuremburg Trials that rid my country of nasty officials.
Wait but what is the point of the law if we can’t follow it and use it as a defense because it will be thrown out for being “immoral”
I love your videos, thank you for making them♥️
oh my god olivia is dripped out holy shit
I believe that law in of itself is a concept controlled by the balance between power and morals, and therefore can only be unjust should the balance be shifted from equilibrium. On the other hand, justice is blinded by power and morals and therefore should blindly follow the course of law, no matter the law. If the law is in equilibrium, then justice will prevail.
This was probably my favourite video and I will probably watch it a couple more times to see if my views on law change, I have no doubt they will, especially in the following years when I begin to study it… Great work 🙂
watch psycho pass
Intresting to watch this as a German. 👀
your content makes me feel like I've learned something while being entertained, your content is… healthy 🙂
"nasty regime" ? did you have to say it that way because you are not allowed to say "Nazi" ?
Great video, as usual, thank you for always bringing and explaining several viewpoints
All laws based on coercion are suspect at best. I believe that to begin to ensure new laws are just, we need to change how we vote on things. Specifically, we should vote on an approval ballot. Until then, most laws are the products of games
The collab we've all been waiting for
Utilitarian law is better
shit this is a deep topic
If a Law is Evil it is Invalid.
If your objection is that Law shouldn't be associated with morality, because of the risk that an evil law may be justified. look at the first sentence.
Hi! My name’s barely educated beyond my own experiential perceptual lens and I have regurgitated opinions 500k+ people NEED TO KNOW ABOUT.
Wow we can't even reference the Nazi regime in this day and age anymore.
Great video! Thanks for it! I would love to hear you discuss pornography in a future video. I believe it would be a very interesting topic.
I think most laws have nothing to do with moralality
Why u wear so many crosses and ur atheist
Andrew Tate in school would solve 99% of all our problems. Men being men again and creating some order in this degenerate society.
Too many big words.
Do you think Loba’s butt in Apex Legends is too big?
It depends on the perspective. I think you should follow your conscience first and foremost because it can deal harsher punishment than the law. Laws are there to facilitate co-existence by giving a counter-weight to anti-social impulses. It is just if sufficiently many people deem it just. I can't tell it in terms of a percentage of the population but this is the foundation. Whether you follow the law or a particular law or not is a matter of your judgment of the situation: Is your concern worth disturbing the social order? Personally I think that law is made by man and can malfunction, therefore it can under certain circumstances be justified to break it. You have to justify it morally, you'll be judged by moral standards in any case, whether you follow the law or not. The important question is: Can you look into the mirror and sleep at night?
is there a case for cancel culture then (not necessarily the way cancel culture operates now but the general idea of it) in which society decides who gets punished and who doesn't in blurry situations? this also provides leeway since it's up to individuals to decide whether they want to cancel someone or not
so punishing leaders who committed mass genocide against certain races is institutionalized expressions of political supremacy?
She's getting closer to anarchism every day and I love it
I agree with Fuller's idealogy.
Taking the case of Osama Bin Ladin, was killing him the way they did really moral? I think the whole legal process of interrogation and court hearings is based on this moral value that one should be allowed to justify themselves before being punished. If America represents a value like equality for all humans, then Bin Ladin should've been allowed an interrogation before he was killed – MORALLY, not just legally.