cases of Peter and Mr Mason. Carretta, released after a relatively short time since their parents killed with cruelty, shocked the Italian public opinion that he still had vivid memories of the atrocious crimes. In the case of
Carretta, even adding the absurd circumstance of use inheritance by the murderer.
The distance between law, justice and their application is so clear as to create confusion and can not but give pause to those who, in life, he studied certain subjects and continues to deal with the philosophy of law, policy and research for the common good.
The thought always comes back to the Angelic Doctor, Saint Thomas Aquinas, perennial beacon in the reflection of those who seek to combine truth, justice and goodness with the reality of everyday social life. He had built a sophisticated philosophical and legal system that had as one of its cornerstones the account that the IUS, that is right, and iustum, or what is right, had words with the same root and expressed concepts who were the first emanation of the latter: IUS should not have been that it was not even iustum, so that in some maxims he said SIVE iustum IUS (ie the right to justice).
was unthinkable that a formulation of the law is not riconducesse to justice and morality.
The problem began later, when the evolution of philosophical thought separated the two concepts, first by putting the will of man as the foundation of law (and not the reason, the right reason, direct emanation of Being), and after placing the principle known as "Hume's Law", named after the English philosopher who formulated the view that "no proposition can be derived straight from the verb from a sentence straight from the verb to be. "Quite the opposite principle of Thomistic AGERE THEY sequitur, meaning" the act must comply with and follows being. "
step towards relativism is logically short, since by denying the fundamental and absolute truth of Being opens the leads to competition among all the desires of all men, each bearing an opinion a priori as valid as the others, regardless of the reason, in this way are intended to prevail only the opinions of majority, or one of the strongest, according to the principle of "war of all against all" of Hobbes (OMNES BELLUM OMNIA CONTRA).
becomes clear that the administration of justice is drifting with the application subjective judges, and the formation of laws adrift of changing opinions and temporary circumstances.
The effect is that people, the people he has in himself the innate sense of justice even if he does not know whether express or struggles to discern, you feel violated her privacy and lose trust in institutions. Not only that: he begins to feel insecure, because he could not receive justice in the case of a wrong right away and begins to want to prevent any crime, so there should be no trial. Hence the maniacal and ever-growing need of security required by administrations, with the corollary of significant expenditure for police, surveillance, preventive measures, etc., not to mention the difficult social relations polluted by a snaking suspicion and fear.
The solution is complex, because as we saw the problem was caused by centuries of reflection today show that all their fallacy, but have so far been considered creditworthy and, indeed, signs of progress of human reason.
Return to a thought system hinged on three main principles bonum, iustum ET VERUM, like the wonderfully built by St. Thomas requires an enormous effort of conversion.
Precisely this, however, is the task entrusted to men of good will.
0 comments:
Post a Comment