ABOUT MORAL AND PHILOSOPHY OF LAW.

THE MORALITY OF LEGAL SCIENCE

Corina Ramona Ionita *

Summary:Ethics is the philosophical theory of morality. The goal of the philosopher is
to give order and consistency to our moral beliefs and connect them as far as possible, one or
more of the universal principles of the presumed validity of their stems, as rules that guides
our conduct. The influence of morality on the law relating to both the process of law, as well
as the application process.Morals appears as a criterion for verification of positive law with
justice correspondence, positive law must be built on the basis of the moral purposes. Legal
rules that contradict moral principles are unfair (lex injusta non est lex). Whenever the
exercise of a right of neglect aspects of humanity (summum jus,summa injuria ) moral
principle of equity.
Key-words:ethics, morality, fairness, justice, positive law.
The philosopher"s efforts gives consistency of our as regards moral sphere which
have resulted in two types of general ethical systems.1
First type may be called teleological. According to this type of theory, moral value of
each act lies in its ability to achieve something good or something bad. If health is seen as
good in itself, for example, when the nature of your ultimatum by acts (feeding the hungry, to
give medical care sick) and the character of other acts (to sell or serve consciously infected)
can be understood in terms their report with it.
Everything is your ultimatum from a moral point of view, according to this type of
theory, and takes the intention with which it was made, namely that to get what is good in
himself: the welfare in itself is the goal toward which is facing any behavior with moral value.
It is the right moral court which directs his constitution and affirmation, the factor
dinamizator of intellectual and political energies serving legal promoting values as universal
values.2
Morality and the right are two aspects of a single principle which is supreme purpose.3
However, having regard a permanent opening between law and morality, the idea of
obligation leads to the idea of moral freedom, because only a willpower free may have

1* Lecturer doctor associated to University Valahia, Targoviste Doina Olga Stefanescu, A. Miroiu(coordonatori),
Adrian-Paul Iliescu, MihaelaMiroiu, Cristian Pirvulescu, Manual philosophy, Ed. Franck
Educational,2003,Bucharest,p. 26.

2Corina A. Dumitrescu,The philosophy of law, Manual Self-Study,Ed. ProUniversitaria,2012,p. 23.

3M. Djuvara,Le fondement du phnomne juridique(Quelques rflexions sur les principes logiques de
la connaissance juridique) ,Paris, Sirey,1913,p. 104.apud E. Gh.Moroianu,Studies of Romanian
Law,,year 22 (55), no. 1, pp. 67-75, Bucharest,Jan-March 2010.

obligations, and this will free shall be defined to be, both at the law school, as well as in
morality, a person.4
There is a reason there is a theoretical and practical sense, which makes us think we
concluded, said Mircea Djuvara, as well as the phenomenon virtually, that is moral and right,it
is designed as a rational reality.5How freedom and will characterised person as active element
in the reality of life practical, it emerges that the entire right is centered on person.
Right that the science can be based, note Mircea Djuvara, than on the principle of
practical reason, i.e. , the morality of law, this principle, and the freedom of reason.6
Problem of connection between law and morality was a constant preoccupation for the
philosophers and jurists. Morality has played and plays an important role in the positive law
with justice , justice,common good ethical and other criteria. By its very nature, the right
involves a professionalism of the human condition in the light of certain values, one of the
first definitions of data's Celsus, a judgement of a value:; eastern Europe burned boni et
aequi(right is art good and equity).
The relationship between law and morality is based on relationships between it
properly and well.
The just, enshrined the right lens in force, shall have regard to objective social order
between individuals and institutions and their organizations, their duties, some for the rest of
the people.
Good for you, on the contrary, to the order of his consciousness had principles-individual, and that impulse for integration in a Standard social order, moral duties are of
individual to himself, causing duties for another. Legislator is a company organ ,style himself
as a moralist is impersonator of consciousness.7
As for moral, Dumitru Draghicescu considers that, to have a common essence, right:
"law etico-the most compelling social, leading external relations of individuals, is justice and
therefore equality and solidarity, which are its proponents deny natural law itself: selection,
competition, inequality".8
Between law and morals are, of course, differences, one being actually outside, and
the other in fact of consciousness.

4Ibidem,p. 105.
5Ibidem,p. 114 and 115.
6V. Morar,Mircea Djuvara(1866-1945), in vol. Anthology of Romanian philosophy (antolog. and
present :MirceaMaciu) ,Bucharest, the Edit.Minerva,1988,p. 146.
7R. Muresan, the problem of moral and right .rules ethical and legal rules ,p. 137 ,source
internet(www.revistatransilvania.ro/archive/ 2006) /pdf/number 8-9/p. 136-137 pdf.
8 Dumitru Draghicescu, problme du dterminisme social, p. 39 (AP. Modern History philosophy,
place. happening ). For reasons of equity: id. , du rolls of l'individual p. 67-78; The idea of justice is
shared between right and moral: id. , droit moral, religion, p. 237 In Romanian law studies, year 6
(39), Oct-dec. 1994, Romanian Academy Publishing House.

By moral means a combination of concepts and rules, attitudes and mentalities, values
and ideals relating to individual behavior in the society9.
Moral rules are the rules of conduct which indicates logical people a model of conduct
necessary and the penalties to be applied, in the case of non-compliance with regulatory
requirements adjustments of the model.
Concept of moral sphere includes moral knowledge (beliefs, concepts, values, moral
ideals, rules, principles and moral relations).
Moral rules based on rules with regard to good or bad, right or wrongly paid, allowed
or not allowed, are a creation of the company. Morality has as its object internal appreciation
of the facts of consciousness.
As an assembly of general rules of conduct personal practical, moral rules, wrote E.
Sperantia "required of consciousness".10
Failure to adhere to moral conduct prescribed result application of sanctions. These
sanctions are different social environment after the reaction to the behavior immoral, or a
moral mind subject who understands and regrets his guilt.
Social environment react to immoral deeds by public opprobium, contempt,
marginalisation, etc. and the subject was even aware of his deed may have pangs of
conscience, regret, etc. Social environment may react and by the application of sanctions
against physical constraint to private individuals who have committed immoral deeds.
Between moral rules and the rules of entitlement there is a close connection, whereas:
A). they are part of the same group of disciplines;
B). is addressed to human behavior;
C). are intended to express the idea of justice in society;
D). are based on the idea of the obligation of the individual, regarded separately or as
a member of a social group organized.
Moral rules are likely to be confused with the rules of law.
The moral rules are not, as a general rule, written rules. They are contained in certain
documents, being the product locality reorganized.
The legal rules, which have become detached gradually from morality and rules of
dietary habits, slipped into an official appearance and are the outcome of work official organs
of the state.
Compliance with the requirements of morality is not guaranteed by public authority,
but also by the action of factors employers, of public opinion, education, etc.
The legal rules are autonomous legal order, from the rules for emotional distress and
moral order. But the mileage is relative, whereas influences moral right, giving it a moral
character, it is essential.
Moral rule is a rule of conduct individual and voluntary, based on justice and equity;
Sanctioning is inside - regret, reproof of conscience or public opprobrium, marginalisation,
confident that what behave unfair manner, incorrectly.
Legal rule is a rule of conduct social, being required to ensure that the order in society;
It is punishable under compulsion.
9 Ibidem, p. 127.
10 E. Sperantia, Introduction to the philosophy of entitlement, 1946, p. 254.

Moral right and far from being excluded shall be supplemented, good and the just
being two facets of a principle. Morality, expressing the ideal common good and to lay down
the principles of truth and justice often influences right. Thus, the obligation food between
close relatives and the obligation of aid to a person in danger is based on a moral obligation of
the charitable institutions.
Natural obligation as a moral obligation, as recognized by the rule of law.
Morality, as well as the right, it is a social phenomenon. But it is law previous, which
was born of moral and tends toward a moral content.
When the right is no longer in accordance with moral principles, has no credibility and
recognition in society.
For the most part, the legal rules tend to dedicate moral rules. This only natural may
be direct or indirect, incomplete, implicit or explicit, if it is accompanied by various sanctions.
Morality is often more demanding, than right. Christian morality requires charity and
justice. Charity requires generosity and forgiveness for ofenses. Often, the right shall be
removed on morality, in order to comply with individual freedom.
When, in a society morals is controversial content, the right be refrain to intervened,
either devoting one of existing philosophies. For example, Christian morality condemns
poligamia and cohabitation. Romanian law prohibits poligamia, but tolerate to a certain
extent, but this partnership.
But right is far from and deplete the content, by transforming moral requirements in
legal rules. There are numerous rules of morals which remain outside of entitlement. In fact,
the right does not have the power to make morality requirements. It only specifies to organize
the order completion of favorable social moral values and prevent proliferation antisocial
deeds.
Law and morals, they are, as it looks like M. Djuvara11 common items and distinctive.
Items common refers to the fact that both categories:
(A) they are designed to express the idea of justice in society;
(B) is addressed to human behavior;
(C) are based on the idea of obligation of individuals
Distinctive elements are: morality is addressed to individual intentions, the right
governing public plotted those intentions. Both legal rules, as well as the moral are
mandatory, but their obligation imposed upon it by different ways12.
In technical language, strictly legal, a distinction between net moral concept of honesty
(honestum) and legal concept "good faith" (the bona fides). In the course of time the concept
has been recognized as a real moral (criterion axiologic moral), being less then devoted all
legal legal systems (criterion legal). Good faith is known and used in almost all modern
languages for example: in the French language - bonne foi, in the German language - bona
fide, in Italian - buona Fede, good faith in the English language.
This will highlight three aspects of the concept of good faith13:
(A) good faith smacks of equity, i.e. smacks of justice, honesty and humanity, which is
based on justice, which must be fair and unbiased investigation.
(B) good faith, that general idea of loyalty in contractual relations;
11 M. Djuvara, General Theory of the Right, Vol. II, Bucharest, 1930, p. 568 ET seq.
12 Sofia Popescu, General Theory of Law, Lex light Publishing House, Bucharest, 2000, p. 124-127

(C) good faith, as well as being incorrect belief that has a person, due to ignorance or
a fault of the right subjectively that invoked, that the right there is either in favor of the latter,
be in favor of someone else.
Good faith objective is synonymous with loyalty, assessed objectively, in accordance
with the traditions established between honest people. It is opposed to fraud.
Good faith subjective means honesty, honesty or faith wrong.
Unit theory concept of good faith is the one that highlights the concept of good faith,
it's best.
Referring us to this theory we distinguish real unitary structure of this concept alive,
unique and complex, which brings together in the matrix to a real the gold: the right psychology
morality.
Both right and moral are parts of social conscience violations a regulatory function of
human behavior in society.
Moral rules are required by soft power by influence public opinion, establishing an
ethics misconduct, and legal rules are coded and legal sanctions, constituting a "minimum
ethics", but a mandatory human behavior which may be made to comply with and by the
power of constraint on the penalties with which it is laid down, unlike the moral rules which
are devoid of this possibility.
Both right, as well as provide moral rules of behavior of the people in the society.
Morality has been defined as a set of rules and concepts of good and evil, about just
and injust or about permissible and forbidden, while the right is the mandatory rules of
behavior, general and impersonal relationships which establish the conduct between people, in
a social framework and which can be carried out and by stress.
As a matter of fact, the distinction between law and morals was delimited in a
particularly slow. Differentiating between them has never been net and make most often, in
connection with the nature expedited - material in the case of entitlement - as well as
psychological, if morals.
Good faith includes psychological concepts of intention and faith and has its spring in
a complex of facts psychological, exteriorizate later via moral values of honesty, session is
fast becoming synonymous with loyalty, prudence, order and temperanta - which shall be
converted into legal values, whenever is the subject of a legal relationship, but not so much as
to lose in any form whatsoever internal character, the psychic facts psychological (intent,
prudence,order).
The law knows and moral evil and good and evil cannot translate into good and no
good for the worse, she is adamant, shall be subject to a single retail sellers and that of
imperativului categorical (Sollen).
Each man recognizes that good faith is the most unimportant of laws and that, at the
same time, it is, however, the most respected14.
Good faith must represent fundamental law which must be observed when the internal
behavior, exactly as the objective is the one who shall prevail, at the level of behavior.
13 Ion Gabriel Anghelus, Psychological Paradigm of Good Faith in the Rule of Law State, file
extract of HTTP
14 I. G Anghelus, op. cit,, p. 45

Important to note is that, the processes of psychological realm, i.e. internal conduct a
subject of law, must always be subject to the right of absolute freedom.
It can be noted that, from the point of view of judicial psychology here to study this
complex of facts opposing psychological: the intention right, our readers, due diligence
(caution), lack of due diligence, harming voluntary of another thing, no longer seems like a
complicated thing in so far as, the establishment of good or remembrance of faith is a matter
of fact on which the magistrates do it on a regular basis in the implementation of daily duty.
Human society, interested in maintaining public order, social balance, maintaining its
structures and forms of organization and functioning, its activities are carried out in an
organized manner and, after some social rules in a given regulatory framework15.
Beyond the theories concerning the relationship between moral and right, I agreed
author"s R. Muresan, that it is not contested that, moral and right constitute distinct normative
systems within the framework of the rules social, legal rules and the moral characteristics with
both proximal genre, as well as those of the difference. All theoretical approaches are centered
on the idea of connection between law and morality have lead to gradual shaping of existing
difference between the two areas.
With respect to the problem of law and morality shall be considered that, in order to
exist as such, the right must meet the condition of intrinsic morality and that total lack of
respect for any desideratum of morality is the result of absence of entitlement.
If it is accepted, however, that, at different times, to different people or even the same
people, within the framework of the different social classes, there is no moral systems very
different and contradictory, that in certain situations other than things can be considered good
or bad, fair or unfair, that there is only moral values relative, then we can say that, in order to
consider the law as having a moral content, they must contain something that would be
common to all moral systems, and this is an obligation, regulatory nature.16
In these circumstances, the assertion that the right would be, by its very nature, moral
does not mean that the right would have a certain content, but that is a rule which lays down a
certain human behavior as required. Therefore the problem between law and morality is one
of the form and not one of content.
The most influence morals shown by materializing ethical value in human rights and
freedom, for moral support interest of the general good. Morality and the right must undertake
a process of symbiosis.
It doesn't matter in the system of what you think or how you do it, but rather what
you're doing, and this because the report is legal intersubjective.
Front of law which must be applied to each category of people in part, "morality might
apply without distinction, anywhere, anytime, to anyone". Individual rights are for all, but
morality is one for all of us. Also, legal rules yielded over time, than a certain amount of time
(ex: the code of Hamurabi,Manu), on the other hand moral rules do not have this feature, they
are over time.
At the outset, the moral was the only means of control. The penalty in the case morals
is not very strict, an excuse for a crime he committed can be an argument to justify a certain
15 Luiza M. Teodorescu , The Romanian Academy, The Institute for Legal Research Ciuhandu pleads
for Church involvement in social life. "Andrei Radulescu", Bucharest, 2012, p. 10
16R. Muresan,op. cit, ,p. 137.

conduct, if of course, this has been carried out without underhanded, but within the
framework morals even minor things are seen and highlighted in the company.
In morality, the penalties shall be remorse, a sense of guilt, disapproval from society,
his so-called reprimand. But right are not confined to both, he may have recourse to a definite
constraint material, or even suppressing freedom.
If we get better, sometimes causes surprise was a penalty more powerful than other
forms. This meant exclusion from the Community(tribe for example) ,what be tantamount to a
social death.
If the war crimes were a period justified political and moral, now they are punished by
law.
System stability has legal basis just to limit human being. Compliance with the rules
stands out from the crowd as a thing in itself. The man adhere to a happiness by carrying out
debt.
Thus, even if it is stipulated in the law that in the time between parents and children
there must be mutual benefit both children as well as parents lead to comply with their
obligations not because it is the law, but also because that is how they feel and considers that
it is a natural thing.
The standards which do not fulfill a moral feature may not constitute legal rules in the
real meaning of the word or are legal rules but imperfect.

Bibliography
Doina Olga Stefanescu, A. Miroiu(coordonatori), Adrian-Paul Iliescu, MihaelaMiroiu,
Cristian Pirvulescu, Manual philosophy, Ed. Franck Educational,2003,Bucharest,p. 26.
Corina
A.
Dumitrescu,Philosophy
of
entitlement,
Manual
Self-Study,Ed.
ProUniversitaria,2012,p. 23.
Mircea Djuvara,Le fondement du phnomne juridique (Quelques rflexions sur les principes
logiques from connaissance juridique ) ,Paris,Librairie Sirey,1913,p. 104.apud
E.Gh.Moroianu ,Studies Communist Romanian,year 22 (55), no. 1, pp. 67-75, Bucharest,JanMarch 2010.
V Morar,Mircea Djuvara(1866-1945), in vol. Anthology of Romanian Philosophy(antolog. si
prezent :Mircea Maciu) ,Bucharest,Edit.Minerva,1988,p. 146.
R .Muresan,Report of moral and right .rules ethical and legal rules,p. 137,source
internet(www.revistatransilvania.ro/archive/ 2006) /pdf/number 8-9/p. 136-137 pdf.
Dumitru Draghicescu,Le problme du dterminisme social, (The idea of justice is shared between
right and moral: id. , droit moral, religion, p. 237 in Romanian law studies, year 6 (39), Octdec. 1994, Romanian Academy Publishing House.
Ibidem, p. 127.
Eugeniu Sperantia, Introduction to the philosophy of entitlement, 1946, p. 254.
Mircea Djuvara, A general theory of the right, Vol. II, Bucharest, 1930, p. 568 ET seq.
Sofia Popescu, A general theory of law, Lex light Publishing House, Bucharest, 2000, p. 124127
Ion Gabriel Anghelus, Psychological paradigm of Good faith in the rule of law state, file
extract of HTTP .