Home > Samples > The good and the bad essay

The good and the bad essay

The definition of good and bad can be divided into the good and the bad. Every person lives by their own ideals of what is “good” and what they think is “bad.” One ideal example of the moral vs. immoral viewpoint is outlined by the Good Samaritan Law. This law offers immunity from liability for a person if they choose to assist another in an emergency. In order for me to have come to the decision that the law ought to require people to be Good Samaritans, there were many important factors and philosophers to contemplate.

One significant deciding factor is the purpose of the law. The general basis/purpose of the law is to classify the rules of jurisprudence in their correct order, show their relation between one another, and settle the manner that new or uncertain cases should be brought under appropriate rules. There are three stances one may take in what they consider the purpose of the law to be. One may believe in legal positivism, where law is dependent upon government for its existence. Another is the idea that law reflects the beliefs of the majority. The third is the idea of true law; can law only happen if there are sanctions and is there such a thing as true law where law does not base itself on an agency or government? Legislating laws evaluates existing standards; they can be changed and/or repealed.
Positive and negative sanctions are applied and the government is ruled in this manner. I highly believe in the third idea of true law and positive and negative sanctions for actions taken. When there are positive and negative consequences, people will choose to act differently because of those, the harsher the negative sanction is will make a person less-likely to pursue the action in fear of the punishment.

After looking at the viewpoints of, Hobbes, Aquinas, and Cicero, I was able to decipher which viewpoint I stood by regarding the Good Samaritan Law. Hobbes thought that the purpose of the law is to promote peace to achieve the goal we are striving for. He thought that everyone is motivated out of self-interest; he had a materialistic view that is based upon metaphysics, the nature of reality. He believed in the idea that everything we see around us is made up of atoms in motion. His materialistic view is applied to psychology, ethics, and political organization. He concluded that every human being is selfish and will only do something because they expect something back. If something is good, there will be a desire for it, and if something is bad, there will be an aversion. These endeavors are driven from motions that are subjective. However, this idea promotes conflict between physical and intelligent power.

  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.