PHIL 420

Philosophy of Law

Fall Quarter 2008

Dr. Jeff Johnson

Questions of moral objectivity, political authority, and the nature of law blend together in a wonderfully interdisciplinary partnership in contemporary jurisprudence and meta-ethical theory.  This quarter we will survey some of the historical sources for this confluence, as well as a few of the most significant contemporary perspectives on these ancient questions.  This has been an on-going area of research interest for me for well over a decade.  The course will conclude with an analysis of three of my own articles and papers.

Concerns about the intrinsic connection between law and morals, or the perennial concern about the moral legitimacy of law and government, obviously depend on some stand on the more basic question of whether there are objective moral values.  The ethical skeptic answers with a resounding no.  The political anarchist echoes this pessimism with the theory that the state simply lacks moral justification, and that law, from the moral perspective, is simply the exercise of coercive force.  The legal realist sees this as an empirical insight into the essence of law itself, and the proper role for legal actors.

As powerful as the normative skeptic's arguments are, a majority of ethical, political, and legal theorists have held out hope for a more comforting view law, government, and morality than one of power and coercion.   A dominant theme in Twentieth Century social, political and legal philosophy sees values and institutions like government and law as very real things, but the sorts of things that are the product of our own social and cultural construction.

At the other end of the spectrum stands the defender of natural law.  The natural lawyer believes that there are discoverable, cross-culturally objective, moral truths.  These truths give us insight into the very nature of law and governmental authority.  The view is easily traceable to the very beginnings of western thinking, but after a long period of being dismissed as hopeless religious and metaphysical, natural law has enjoyed a real renaissance in contemporary legal thought.  I hope to convince you that the secular natural law perspective deserves equal consideration in moral and political theory.

UWR Outcomes for Upper Division Writing Intensive Courses:

• Students will produce at least 5,000 words (including drafts, in-class writing, informal papers, and polished papers); 2,000 words of this total should be in polished papers which students have revised after receiving feedback and criticism.

• Students will practice the forms of writing and reflect upon the nature of the writing used by graduates and professionals in the discipline the course represents.

• Students will write at least one paper integrating information from more than one source, employing the appropriate documentation style for the discipline represented by the course.

• Students will draft, revise, and edit their formal written work.

• Students will seek assistance from a Writing Tutor in the Writing Lab when needed and when referred by the instructor.

Additional Outcomes:

• Understand the conceptual issues in natural law theory

• Understand the conceptual issues in legal positivism

• Understand the conceptual issues in legal realism

• Understand the conceptual issues in moral realism

• Understand the conceptual issues in contractarianism

• Understand the conceptual issues in criminal punishment

• Conduct independent research in philosophy of law

• Read philosophical and legal texts critically and with understanding

• Write effectively about philosophical and legal controversies

Means of Assessment and Grading:

• Seven short (750 to 1200 words) discussion papers -- combined 40% of course grade (outcomes 1 - 6; 9&10)

• A 2500 to 4000 word analytical paper -- 40% of course grade. (outcomes 7- 10)

• Attendance and participation in class discussions -- 10% of course grade (outcomes 1 - 6)

• Final exam on legal punishment -- 10% of course grade (outcome 7)

• Please note: a grade of at least C- is required in order for this course to count toward the University Writing Requirement 

ACADEMIC HONESTY

I am including below Eastern's Academic Honesty Code.  It is vitally important that you carefully read it, and that you understand that it is my intention to follow this code to the letter.  I really can't think of a better way to ruin your experience with this course, than to disregard this code.  Obviously, if you have any questions, I can't urge you too strongly to ask me.

ACADEMIC HONESTY CODE

All members of the Eastern Oregon University academic community are responsible for compliance with its Academic Honesty Code. Students are required to report violations to the respective faculty member of a course. Provisions of the Academic Honesty Code are:

1. Collaboration while taking any quizzes, in-class examinations, or take home examinations without the instructor's written approval is forbidden. The faculty member is responsible for defining limits for other collaborative learning activities for each course.

2. Plagiarism or representation of the work of others as one's own is forbidden. The faculty member will make clear the format for properly citing sources of information not original by the student.

3. Explicit approval by all instructors is required if the same work is to be submitted to more than one course, even if is not within the same term.

Violations of the Academic Honesty Code may result in both academic and behavioral penalties including possible suspension or expulsion from the University.

An automatic grade of zero for any work which is a violation of the Academic Honesty Code will be assigned by the instructor. The instructor may also assign a grade of F for the course after discussion with the respective School Dean. Students may appeal the course grade to the respective School Dean, who is the final level of appeal on the matter of course grade penalties for academic dishonesty.

The faculty member is also required to file a disciplinary complaint to the Vice President for Student Affairs about any student believed to have violated the Academic Honesty Code. If deemed appropriate, hearing procedures will be implemented by a University Hearing Officer as outlined in the Code of Student Conduct. Possible sanctions considered by the Student Conduct Committee include probation, suspension, and expulsion.

Tentative Calendar