The Absoluteness of Law in the Relativity of the World

Philosophy of Law
1

In essence, law is presented as absolute justice, helping us discern good from evil. But is that really the case? Or is it simply the absolutization of one aspect of morality to pull people away from their “wild instincts,” from the way an individual chooses absolute evil for themselves?

Many may see it as true absoluteness, but to me, it’s just a way for people to self-regulate, trying to prevent each other from becoming monsters in the eyes of others, and not easily swayed by a good deed. It allows them to achieve balance at “level 0,” where perspective is no longer subjective, no longer a matter of being forced into one side by beliefs, morality, etc. Rather, it’s about following a predetermined path, so that the next step is simply a single choice, an action of the ego of a self-centered free spirit, of someone moved by something beautiful in their eyes, and that will result in punishment for anyone based on the absolute choice they’ve made.

I’m not here to say we’re abolishing the law or anything like that. Rather, I’m here to explain the importance of law in the “whirlwind” of life.

But looking at it from another perspective, does it absolutely resolve everything? Or does it simply present an action in terms of its outcome, then conclude whether it’s good or bad? It doesn’t give us a process, a context, or the psychology of the person being called a criminal.

Suppose there were a deranged murderer; it would be easy to conclude that it was utterly wrong. But consider this: a young woman is forced to kill a child in her womb because she knows she is incapable of helping, loving, and giving her child a bright future; she doesn’t want her child’s life, or her own, to become hell. Is that a bad thing? Or is it simply a love born from circumstances and the means she possesses, leading her to make the best decision for both sides?

Through this, we realize that the law sometimes completely resolves human issues… But that doesn’t mean we should betray the law. Instead, we should transform ourselves into people who know how to live in harmony, help others, and sacrifice for them, even if they are a dictator who has killed millions… This isn’t called being amazing or heartless; it’s the very capacity for people to teach each other the most valuable lessons through small actions that have a big impact on individuals with their own ideals, dreams, and futures…

It’s about achieving peace between different ways, maintaining relativity while always being equal to those who are absolute. It doesn’t make us rich or great. The meaning of flowers will be creatively formed by evil spirits, earthly angels, or simply a human being…

This world is cruel, but the power to decide its beauty rests with you - the free ones.

2

In my opinion, law, or the right in the broad sense, is a construct. What we call law today is not something given from above, not open, not fair, and generally devoid of any moral content. Law is a written norm of desirable behavior. Desired by whom: the master, the ruling class? There are many approaches here.

Different people can see many things in the law. Some see truth, some hope, some value, and still others an instrument of violence.

It would be important to understand the relationship between morality and law. A simple example: in one culture, having multiple wives is morally good, but in another, it is not. Law is the same: in one culture, polygamy may be the law, in another, it is not.

So what’s the difference? Law is a written norm of behavior, the violation of which is subject to state coercion. Morality is not. Morality presupposes internal responsibility to one’s own ideals (and in some societies, public censure).

Is law written morality? In some cases, yes; in others, no.

The function of law is both regulatory and protective. Law and order emerge when people cannot agree on their own: for example, one considers certain words offensive, while another does not. How can they be resolved before they interrupt each other?

Law and morality have different methods, but also different goals. In this sense, one could say that law is an attempt to optimize human behavior regardless of their personal characteristics. Law is universal for all residents of a state.