Law VS intuition: Can we do law better?
Details
ANNOUNCEMENT: For this particular event, the owner of Dong Qu has kindly agreed to host us. Do buy a drink or two as a token of appreciation!
Venue: 3rd floor (take lift) https://maps.app.goo.gl/Dwd4XAi9LbGNG2D26
“Rule of law” is one of the hallmarks of a developed nation. Despite being a fundamental part of society, the legal system is one of the least understood institutions we rely on.
Most people would expect the legal system to uphold some common sense principles like:
- Fair: No group should be systematically disadvantaged or unfairly treated.
- Accessible: people are entitled to justice even without money or insider knowledge.
- Clear: ordinary people can understand.
- Consistently applied: no selective application/protections.
- Just/moral: moral wrongdoers are suitable punished.
But when we look at actual cases, many of these assumptions fall apart.
In this session, we’ll explore real-world examples where the law contradicts intuitive morality or common-sense expectations. And through these cases, we ask: What principles is the legal system actually designed to protect? Often it is not intuitive fairness, but rather:
- Centralization and uniformity
- Predictability
- Social stability
- Administrative efficiency
- Legitimacy
- The ability of society to function without constant litigation
How do these principles compare with our moral intuitions? Do our moral intuitions change once we have to consider resource constraints and practical challenges?
Should we have a say not just in what laws are legislated, but in the process by which those laws are enforced?