Research Paper on:
Comparative Analysis of Dworkin and Devlin on Morality in Society

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
part. And while these issues are paramount today, morality as it respects the law has always been a controversial subject. In his critique of Lord Devlins position that criminal  law should be drawn from public morality, Ronald Dworkin writes that what is shocking and wrong is not his idea that the communitys morality counts, but his idea of what  counts as communitys morality (Dyzenhaus & Ripstein, 2001). In other words, according to Devlin, morality is more aligned with the will of the people and what they decide as opposed  to contemplating a scenario based on moral principles. With Devlins position, intrinsic morality is thrown out in favor of a position of utility. The utilitarian view that the quantity  of happiness, or majority rules, is rather obvious. Devlin bases his view on the idea that a shared morality, or a morality of a society, is a necessity. One  would think that he would agree with the idea of cultural relatively. Indeed, morality is a social construction and not something that emanates from the soul or from God. Dworkins  ideas are quite different but there are some threads of similarity. Dworkins objections do not appear to be based necessarily on the way in which the ideas are created but  rather because there is a lack of autonomy. He does not view morality as something that is embraced by a group, but rather as something that is individualistic. One may  equate Dworkins ideas with libertarianism. Individuals come to their own conclusions about morality and this is largely intrinsic, but also cerebral. However, they reach their conclusion, they should be allowed  to act as they see fit as long as it does not harm others. In society today, this principal is primarily followed in free nations except there is still often