|
LAW
May 4, 2020 15:07:38 GMT
Post by Admin on May 4, 2020 15:07:38 GMT
Manusmriti en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ManusmritiThe Manusmṛiti (Sanskrit: मनुस्मृति), also spelled as Manusmruti,[1] is an ancient legal text among the many Dharmaśāstras of Hinduism.[2] It was one of the first Sanskrit texts to have been translated into English in 1794, by Sir William Jones,[2] and was used to formulate the Hindu law by the British colonial government.[3][4] Over fifty manuscripts of the Manusmriti are now known, but the earliest discovered, most translated and presumed authentic version since the 18th century has been the "Calcutta manuscript with Kulluka Bhatta commentary".[5] Modern scholarship states this presumed authenticity is false, and the various manuscripts of Manusmriti discovered in India are inconsistent with each other, and within themselves, raising concerns of its authenticity, insertions and interpolations made into the text in later times.[5][6] The metrical text is in Sanskrit, is variously dated to be from the 2nd century BCE to 3rd century CE, and it presents itself as a discourse given by Manu (Svayambhuva) and Bhrigu on dharma topics such as duties, rights, laws, conduct, virtues and others. The text's fame spread outside India, long before the colonial era. The medieval era Buddhistic law of Myanmar and Thailand are also ascribed to Manu,[7][8] and the text influenced past Hindu kingdoms in Cambodia and Indonesia.[9] Manusmriti is also called the Mānava-Dharmaśāstra or Laws of Manu.[10]
|
|
|
LAW
May 17, 2020 17:23:22 GMT
Post by Admin on May 17, 2020 17:23:22 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
LAW
May 21, 2020 18:32:30 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2020 18:32:30 GMT
I like the law of the jungle
And the law of the dapper Don.
I like Law and Order SVU
I like lawyers and advocates. And spiritual warfare movies with all of the above.
|
|
|
LAW
May 23, 2020 17:56:01 GMT
Post by Admin on May 23, 2020 17:56:01 GMT
|
|
|
LAW
May 26, 2020 16:20:39 GMT
Post by Admin on May 26, 2020 16:20:39 GMT
Representing People with Autism Spectrum Disorders The reason for compiling the expert opinions in Representing People with Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Practical Guide for Criminal Defense Lawyers is two-fold: first, there is a growing recognition that people with ASD are involved in the criminal justice system and need vigorous, informed advocacy; and two, that there is a need for practical, easily digestible information for lawyers. www.americanbar.org/products/inv/book/393535910/www.elizabethkelleylaw.com/bio.html
|
|
|
LAW
Sept 22, 2020 17:28:59 GMT
Post by Admin on Sept 22, 2020 17:28:59 GMT
International Lawen.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_law"Law of Nations" redirects here. For the 18th-century political treatise, see The Law of Nations. International law, also known as public international law and law of nations,[1] is the set of rules, norms, and standards generally accepted in relations between nations.[2][3] It establishes normative guidelines and a common conceptual framework to guide states across a broad range of domains, including war, diplomacy, trade, and human rights. International law allows for the practice of stable, consistent, and organized international relations.[4] The sources of international law include international custom (general state practice accepted as law), treaties, and general principles of law recognized by most national legal systems. International law may also be reflected in international comity, the practices and customs adopted by states to maintain good relations and mutual recognition, such as saluting the flag of a foreign ship or enforcing a foreign legal judgment. International law differs from state-based legal systems in that it is primarily—though not exclusively—applicable to countries, rather than to individuals, and operates largely through consent, since there is no universally accepted authority to enforce it upon sovereign states. Consequently, states may choose to not abide by international law, and even to break a treaty.[5] However, such violations, particularly of customary international law and peremptory norms (jus cogens), can be met with coercive action, ranging from military intervention to diplomatic and economic pressure. The relationship and interaction between a national legal system (municipal law) and international law is complex and variable. National law may become international law when treaties permit national jurisdiction to supranational tribunals such as the European Court of Human Rights or the International Criminal Court. Treaties such as the Geneva Conventions may require national law to conform to treaty provisions. National laws or constitutions may also provide for the implementation or integration of international legal obligations into domestic law. The Law of Nationsen.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Law_of_NationsThe Law of Nations: Or, Principles of the Law of Nature Applied to the Conduct and Affairs of Nations and Sovereigns (French: Le Droit des gens : Principes de la loi naturelle, appliqués à la conduite et aux affaires des Nations et des Souverains) is a legal treatise on international law by Emerich de Vattel, published in 1758.[1] Rule of lawen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_lawThe rule of law is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as: "The authority and influence of law in society, especially when viewed as a constraint on individual and institutional behavior; (hence) the principle whereby all members of a society (including those in government) are considered equally subject to publicly disclosed legal codes and processes."[2] The term "rule of law" is closely related to "constitutionalism" as well as "Rechtsstaat", and refers to a political situation, not to any specific legal rule.[3][4][5] Use of the phrase can be traced to 16th-century Britain, and in the following century the Scottish theologian Samuel Rutherford employed it in arguing against the divine right of kings.[6] John Locke wrote that freedom in society means being subject only to laws made by a legislature that does not apply to everyone, with a person being otherwise free from both governmental and private restrictions upon liberty. "The rule of law" was further popularized in the 19th century by British jurist A. V. Dicey. However, the principle, if not the phrase itself, was recognized by ancient thinkers; for example, Aristotle wrote: "It is more proper that law should govern than any one of the citizens".[7] The rule of law implies that every person is subject to the law, including people who are lawmakers, law enforcement officials, and judges.[8] In this sense, it stands in contrast to tyranny or oligarchy where the rulers are held above the law. Lack of the rule of law can be found in both democracies and monarchies, for example when there is neglect or ignorance of the law. The rule of law is more apt to decay if a government has insufficient corrective mechanisms for restoring it. Rule according to higher lawen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_according_to_higher_lawThe rule according to a higher law is a statement which expresses that no law may be enforced by the government unless it conforms with certain universal principles (written or unwritten) of fairness, morality, and justice.[1] Thus, the rule according to a higher law may serve as a practical legal criterion to qualify the instances of political or economical decision-making, when a government, even though acting in conformity with clearly defined and properly enacted legal rules, still produces results which many observers find unfair or unjust.[2] The idea of a law of ultimate justice over and above the momentary law of the state—a higher law—was first introduced into post-Roman Europe by the Catholic canon law jurists.[3] "Higher law" can be interpreted in this context as the divine or natural law or basic legal values, established in the international law—the choice depending on the viewpoint; no matter the source, it is a law above the law.[4] And it is in this capacity that it possesses the equal legal value for both the common and civil law jurisdictions, as opposed to natural law which is largely associated with common law.[5] "To recognize the necessary connection between the rule of law as an ideal and well-constructed constitutional government does not and should not be taken to imply that all states can or should maintain the same constitutional structures in practice".[6] The rule according to higher law is a practical approach to the implementation of the higher law theory that creates a bridge of mutual understanding (with regard to universal legal values) between the English-language doctrine of the rule of law, traditional for the countries of common law, and the originally German doctrine of Rechtsstaat, translated into other languages of continental Europe as état de droit (French), estado de derecho (Spanish), stato di diritto (Italian), and Правовое государство (pravovoe gosudarstvo) (Russian).[7] The latter doctrine is the product of continental European legal thought, which had adopted it from German legal philosophy. Its name can be translated into English as "state of law"—meaning the state in which the exercise of governmental power is kept in check by the higher law rather than by the changeable law established by this state.[citation needed] Amartya Sen mentioned that the legal theorists in ancient India used the classical Sanskrit tern "nyāya" in the sense of not just a matter of judging institutions and rules, but of judging the societies themselves.[8] Universal lawen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_lawIn law and ethics, universal law or universal principle refers as concepts of legal legitimacy actions, whereby those principles and rules for governing human beings' conduct which are most universal in their acceptability, their applicability, translation, and philosophical basis, are therefore considered to be most legitimate. One type of Universal Law is the Law of Logic which prohibits logical contradictions known as sophistry. The Law of Logic is based upon the universal idea that logic is defined as that which is not illogical and that which is illogical is that which involves a logical contradiction, such as attempting to assert that an apple and no apple can exist at and in the same time and in the same place, and attempting to assert that A and not A can exist at and in the same time and in the same place.
|
|
|
LAW
Nov 6, 2020 20:26:23 GMT
Post by Admin on Nov 6, 2020 20:26:23 GMT
Emerging Digital Mental Health Technologies Raise Legal and Ethical IssuesInadequate legal and regulatory structures allow for abuses with digital mental health technologies. www.madinamerica.com/2020/11/emerging-digital-mental-health-technologies-raise-legal-ethical-issues/Experts have called for better legal and regulatory frameworks to address the expanding use of digital technologies in mental health initiatives. A new mapping study by an expert in disability law, Piers Gooding, in the International Journal of Law and Psychiatry provides a framework for organizing these new digital mental health technologies. His work also clarifies the yawning gap between current policies and regulations and the scale of the legal, ethical, and social risks that accompany their use. Mapping the rise of digital mental health technologies: Emerging issues for law and societywww.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160252719300950Abstract The use of digital technologies in mental health initiatives is expanding, leading to calls for clearer legal and regulatory frameworks. However, gaps in knowledge about the scale and nature of change impede efforts to develop responsible public governance in the early stages of what may be the mass uptake of ‘digital mental health technologies’. This article maps established and emerging technologies in the mental health context with an eye to locating major socio-legal issues. The paper discusses various types of technology, including those designed for information sharing, communication, clinical decision support, ‘digital therapies’, patient and/or population monitoring and control, bio-informatics and personalised medicine, and service user health informatics. The discussion is organised around domains of use based on the actors who use the technologies, and those on whom they are used. These actors go beyond mental health service users and practitioners/service providers, and include health and social system or resource managers, data management services, private companies that collect personal data (such as major technology corporations and data brokers), and multiple government agencies and private sector actors across diverse fields of criminal justice, education, and so on. The mapping exercise offers a starting point to better identify cross-cutting legal, ethical and social issues at the convergence of digital technology and contemporary mental health practice.
|
|
|
LAW
Nov 27, 2020 20:54:06 GMT
Post by Admin on Nov 27, 2020 20:54:06 GMT
20 UNIVERSAL LAWSThere are many universal laws and some claim there are 20 universal laws. The 20 laws cover Karma, reincarnation, vibration, attraction, Soul Evolution and much more. All these laws are covered in Dick Sutphen's book Lighting the Light Within which was published in 1987. This is an extract from the book. www.one-mind-one-energy.com/20-universal-laws.html
|
|
|
LAW
Dec 2, 2020 20:34:48 GMT
Post by Admin on Dec 2, 2020 20:34:48 GMT
HOW THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM FAILS PEOPLE WITH MENTAL ILLNESS“I found your baby,” Michelle Durden recalls the police officer saying after her son went missing. “He’s alive. And he’s in jail.” theintercept.com/2020/11/26/mental-illness-prison-jail-police/AT FIRST, MICHELLE DURDEN thought her eldest son, Cameron Davis, was just going through some early 20s growing pains. He dropped out of college and quit his job. He began to lose weight and grow his hair long. He spent a lot of time in his room, teaching himself to play guitar. He withdrew from friends and family. “He was just a good kid. He had a genius IQ, just smart, nice to everybody; loves old people, dogs, the whole thing,” she said. “And then he just got weird.” Perhaps, Durden and her husband thought, Davis was just trying to find himself. They never considered there might be something else going on. So, in the fall of 2018, they packed Davis into his Ford Fiesta with his clothes, guitars and amplifier, some groceries and cash, and waved goodbye as the 23-year-old set off from their home in North Carolina to Stockton, California, where he would stay with his younger brother, Kevin. Kevin helped Davis settle in and even got him a job at a vineyard. But soon, things went sideways. Davis was fired for ignoring his duties and instead lying in the grass staring at the sky. He began talking to himself, laughing inappropriately, and became paranoid around Kevin’s friends. It all came to a head late one night in January 2019, when Kevin called his mother. Davis was in the background yelling and playing his guitar; Kevin was worried that the neighbors would call the cops. He’d told Davis that, but he wouldn’t stop, Durden recalled. Davis said he “didn’t understand what the word ‘neighbors’ meant.” Durden was scared. Something was seriously wrong. She convinced Davis to come home so he could be seen at Duke Medical Center. It had taken him two-and-a-half days to make the cross-country trip to California, so Durden figured she’d see him soon. He never showed up. Four days later she filed a missing person’s report with the Stockton police, and they quickly located Davis in Los Angeles. A cop there stopped him and said he should call his mother. She again told her son to come home. More time went by, and on January 24, she again called the police to file a new report. Finally, in early February, Durden got a call from a Stockton officer who told her, “‘I found your baby,’” she recalled. “And she’s like, ‘He’s alive. And he’s in jail.’” On January 28, 2019, Davis had been pulled over for speeding just outside of Tyler, Texas, in the northeast part of the state. As the state trooper sat in his vehicle checking Davis’s license and registration, Davis hit the gas, touching off a high-speed chase that ended after Davis damaged his car; no one was hurt. Davis was arrested, prosecuted, and sent to prison. Durden was stunned. Since then, she has struggled to understand a criminal justice system that she feels has aggressively ignored her son’s deepening mental health crisis, which is also what she believes prompted him to flee the cops in the first place. “Where’s the common sense where somebody goes, ‘There might be something wrong with this kid’?” How those with mental illness are treated in the system has become a focus in the ongoing calls for criminal justice reform that have increased in volume since the killing of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer in May. At least 25 percent of fatal police encounters involve a person with mental illness, and individuals with untreated mental illness are 16 times more likely to be killed during an encounter with police, according to a report from the Treatment Advocacy Center. “I’ve heard a thousand stories like this,” Alisa Roth, author of “Insane: America’s Criminal Treatment of Mental Illness,” said of Davis’s case. The criminal justice system — from police contact to prosecution and prison — has been thrust onto the front lines of handling mental health crises and is ill-equipped to do so, Roth said. “It all needs to be fixed.”
|
|
|
LAW
Dec 9, 2020 17:24:24 GMT
Post by Admin on Dec 9, 2020 17:24:24 GMT
Quantum Mechanics and the Laws of Logic, Part 1BY KENNETH R. SAMPLES - JUNE 11, 2019 reasons.org/explore/blogs/reflections/read/reflections/2019/06/11/quantum-mechanics-and-the-laws-of-logic-part-1Having worked at science-faith apologetics organization Reasons to Believe for more than 20 years, I’ve observed that scientists and philosophers often think differently about the world. With the types of specialized training in their academic backgrounds, scientists and philosophers tend to ask different kinds of questions about reality and truth. Unfortunately, they also have a tendency to talk past one other. Recently, I had a social media interaction with a scientist about whether the findings of quantum mechanics invalidate the logical law of noncontradiction. Here, in part 1 of 3 in this series, I’ll provide a little background on the laws of logic and the theory of physics known as quantum mechanics. Then I’ll share some of my interaction with the scientist about the relationship between the two topics. Three Foundational Laws of Logic The study of logic recognizes three laws of thought as bedrock principles: the law of noncontradiction, the law of excluded middle, and the law of identity. Their importance to human thought and discourse cannot be overstated. These logical anchors, so to speak, can be stated to reflect a metaphysical perspective (what is or is not—being) or an epistemological perspective (what can be true or not true—truth).1 Here are the three logical laws stated and explained: 1. The law of noncontradiction: A thing, A, cannot at once be and not be (A cannot equal A and equal non-A at the same time and in the same way); they are mutually exclusive (not both). A dog cannot be a dog and be a non-dog. 2. The law of excluded middle: A thing, A, is or it is not, but not both or neither (either A or non-A), they are jointly exhaustive—one of them must be true. There is no middle ground between a dog and a non-dog. 3. The law of identity: A thing, A, is what it is (A is A). A dog is a dog. Law of Noncontradiction (LNC) To help explain further, here is an example of a logical contradiction from the claims of two world religions: A. Jesus Christ is God incarnate (Christianity). B. Jesus Christ is not God incarnate (Islam). According to the LNC, these two statements (represented as A and B) negate or deny one another. In other words, if statement A is true, then statement B is false, and conversely. Thus, logically, both of these statements cannot be true. So contradictory relationships reflect a “not both true” status. Quantum Mechanics (QM) For a basic understanding of quantum mechanics, Live Science defines it this way: Quantum mechanics is the branch of physics relating to the very small. It results in what may appear to be some very strange conclusions about the physical world. At the scale of atoms and electrons, many of the equations of classical mechanics, which describe how things move at everyday sizes and speeds, cease to be useful. In classical mechanics, objects exist in a specific place at a specific time. However, in quantum mechanics, objects instead exist in a haze of probability; they have a certain chance of being at point A, another chance of being at point B and so on.2 The challenge of QM in the context of the LNC is that light (a subatomic object) seems to be both a wave and a particle simultaneously, thus A and non-A. Logical Interaction Here is what a scientist said to me on social media: The law of noncontradiction is violated by solid empirical science. At the quantum level, a subatomic particle can be in multiple locations at the same time. A particle can be both a wave and a particle. At the quantum level, cause may occur after effect. If this is true at the molecular base of our reality, how strongly can we hold on to the law of noncontradiction? I responded by thanking the scientist and saying that philosophers and scientists need to dialogue with each other more on these kinds of topics. I then offered my brief take on the issue. The LNC cast metaphysically (in terms of being) states the following: “Nothing can both be and not be at the same time and in the same respect.” I don’t think quantum mechanics actually denies the law of noncontradiction. What we can say is that under certain experimental conditions, light (a subatomic object) appears as a wave. But under other experimental conditions, light appears as a particle. So subatomic objects are not particles that are also nonparticles or waves that are also nonwaves; they are objects that behave sometimes like particles and sometimes like waves. Light behaves as a wave and a particle in different experimental conditions and, thus, in different logical respects. Hence, the experimental results of QM do not invalidate the LNC (A cannot equal A and equal non-A at the same time and in the same relationship). The fundamental problem with any denial of the LNC is that the laws of logic make rational thought possible. In this very case, both a scientist and a philosopher exchanged ideas under the assumption of existing laws of logic. Thus, philosophers need input from scientists just as scientists need input from philosophers. And Christians would do well to populate both critical disciplines. Summary If I were to summarize the issue so you can use it on social media, I would say that quantum mechanics is counterintuitive to our ordinary notion of how larger objects react, but it is not a genuine violation of the law of noncontradiction. The laws of logic are considered necessary and inescapable because all thought, correspondence, and action presuppose their truth and application. Reflections: Your Turn Can you concisely state and explain the three laws of logic? Have you used them in your interactions? Visit Reflections on WordPress to comment with your response. Resources For studies in logic in the context of the Christian worldview, see Kenneth Richard Samples, A World of Difference: Putting Christian Truth-Claims to the Worldview Test (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007), chapters 3 and 4.
|
|
|
LAW
Dec 9, 2020 17:26:56 GMT
Post by Admin on Dec 9, 2020 17:26:56 GMT
|
|
|
LAW
Dec 10, 2020 12:04:37 GMT
Post by Admin on Dec 10, 2020 12:04:37 GMT
The language of love in a 12th-century English law bookpsyche.co/ideas/the-language-of-love-in-a-12th-century-english-law-bookIn the final scene of Legally Blonde (2001), Elle Woods quotes Aristotle as part of her graduation speech: ‘The law is reason free from passion.’ ‘No offence to Aristotle,’ she continues, but ‘I have come to find that passion is a key ingredient to the study and practice of law.’ Elle captures a contradiction between a common conception of law as emotionless, and the practice of law as something that in reality always involves emotions. This tension between the theory and experience of law is one that goes back centuries, even millennia. The history of law challenges any assumption that law should, by its nature, be isolated from human feeling. Instead, it reveals nuanced ways in which emotions impact legal processes and enable law to carry more social power. Law isn’t simply about the application of abstract principles; it’s about shaping relationships between real people. Emotions are one way that law, whether in a murder trial or a contract signing, connects to the broader social reality of its participants. An early 12th-century English law book called The Laws of Henry I (Leges Henrici Primi in the original Latin) highlights the role of informal agreements between litigants, which draw on emotional bonds to create peace. When discussing different ways of solving a dispute, the Laws state: ‘An agreement supersedes law, and love supersedes judgment’ (‘pactum enim legem vincit et amor iudicium’). This means that a voluntary agreement is preferable to a sentence given by an official justice. Love, or amor in Latin, could provide a more effective resolution than a legal sentence. The author describes agreements based on love and friendship as legally binding. They share many of the same trappings as court settlements, including being made in the presence of witnesses and potentially overseen by a justice. Love-based settlements and formal judgments differed in the amount of flexibility they offered. The former enabled disputants to choose their own terms and create an agreement that fit their social reality. The Laws of Henry I, for example, stipulates that, in a dispute between two neighbours, their lord ‘shall bring them together by friendship or shall give a judgment’ (‘amicitia congreget aut sequestret iudicium’). If, as was common, these neighbours had a border dispute, an official judgment might simply dictate where the border should lie. An informal agreement designed by the neighbours themselves might take other concerns into account, such as past grievances or rights to other property nearby. By focusing on creating friendship, this kind of agreement could encompass more of what mattered to the participants and prevent future disputes. Often, modern translations of medieval legal texts use language that de-emphasises the emotional content of the original. L J Downer, the translator of The Laws of Henry I, for example, renders the Latin terms amor, dilectione and amicitia into English using phrases such as ‘friendly agreement’ or ‘amicable settlement’, when a more direct translation would use ‘love’ and ‘friendship’. Downer’s translation captures some of the social power of love and friendship in the Middle Ages, but it also obscures the emotional power of these terms. Love wasn’t simply a quality describing informal settlements; love itself was the basis of the settlement. Men and women of the 12th century placed a high value on love and friendship, which could publicly reinforce virtue and honour. These social and emotional layers of agreements based on amor, dilectione and amicitia were central to how they could sustain peace. Anglo-Norman law shows us how cultural ideas about emotional bonds could shape the practice of law. In the 12th century, love wasn’t simply a personal feeling; it could be both a forceful passion and a public expression of status. Letters from aristocratic men to their king could be so affectionate as to resemble modern love letters. To seal peace agreements, kings gave each other the kiss of peace. Emotional gestures added power to political rituals, enabling lords and royalty to reinforce alliances and connect political relationships to the spiritual obligations of Christian love. The language of love could signal personal feelings of friendship and affection, while at the same time formalising a political alliance through a publicly displayed bond. These layered meanings made love an ideal symbol for resolving disputes. As English common law developed in the second half of the 12th century, law clerks and justices envisioned it more as a self-contained system, with its own rules discrete from social practice outside of the courts. This development involved distancing law from emotions. However, even when the relationship between law and social norms becomes less direct, there is always a relationship, with influence travelling in both directions. Law is practised and theorised by living people, whether justices, administrators, lawyers or litigants, who carry their cultural values into the courtroom with them. Today, emotions have a complicated, often contradictory role in law. Victim impact statements, for example, provide space for victims of crime to describe their emotional suffering, with the potential to influence sentencing. The case of the former Olympic doctor Larry Nassar perhaps best encapsulates this practice, as the judge Rosemarie Aquilina allowed more than 150 women to make statements as an outlet for emotional processing. Articles in Time and Vox magazines, however, criticised Aquilina’s open indignation for undermining the impartiality of justice. For these writers, the justness of law rests on the neutral application of rational rules, without room for emotions. Juries, too, are often expected to be emotionless. Jurors who express sympathy for a defendant are likely to be criticised and taken less seriously, especially when they are women. However, a number of studies have shown that jurors make decisions based on implicit assumptions about what emotions people should feel. Chillingly, rape victims are less likely to be believed if they appear calm rather than hysterical. Defendants in capital cases are more likely to be sentenced to death if they don’t visibly show remorse. Cultural norms about emotions have a serious, direct impact on the outcomes of legal cases. Rather than avoiding engagement with these realities about the role of emotions in the legal system, we should analyse them head-on. The Laws of Henry I can’t offer us a neat lesson for law today. However, examples from 12th-century law prompt us to consider how emotions should fit into a complete legal system. From the very origins of the Anglo-American legal tradition, emotions have had the potential to influence decisions and support dispute resolutions. If, as Aristotle claimed, law really is ‘reason free from passion’, its impact would be constrained to the direct effects of its sentencing. If a key goal of law is to create social harmony that extends beyond the doors of its courtrooms and lawyers’ offices, it should take the social and emotional lives of its participants into consideration. Judges and jurors often do this already, in ways that we should not leave unexamined. Perhaps most litigants today aren’t looking to join in love with the people they sue. But strategies that formally enable emotional processing, expression and relationship building are anything but irrational; they could be instrumental to law that works.
|
|
|
LAW
Dec 18, 2020 22:44:59 GMT
Post by Admin on Dec 18, 2020 22:44:59 GMT
Education December 18, 2019 Five Ways Chess Makes You a Better Law Student and LawyerBy Mark Kende 6 ¼ min www.intellectualtakeout.org/article/five-ways-chess-makes-you-better-law-student-and-lawyer/Paul Morphy was a 19th-century New Orleans chess prodigy who was the de facto world chess champion during much of his short life. He rarely lost when he played throughout Europe and the United States. He was also a lawyer who graduated from what is now Tulane Law School. As a student, he was said to have memorized the Louisiana Civil Code in English and French. His father was a prominent Louisiana judge. There are other talented chess-playing lawyers, though none, in my view, as brilliant at chess as Morphy. Three 20th century champions all agree that Morphy was among the greatest chess players of any era. The general view is that he would have the chess grandmaster title, the highest title in the world of chess, if he were alive today. As a law professor and high-level amateur player, I believe that playing chess is great training to be a successful law student and lawyer. Here are five reasons why. 1. Intellectually rigorous Much like law school, chess is intellectually rigorous. Playing chess at the highest level is so hard that Microsoft founder Bill Gates lost after only nine moves in an exhibition blitz game with the current world champion, Norwegian Grandmaster Magnus Carlsen. One might have expected Gates to last longer given his genius. A chess player must concentrate for as many as five or six hours in serious tournaments, and a single lapse can cause a loss. Learning to concentrate is also invaluable for law school. Aspiring law students often take undergraduate classes that are part of a “pre-law” program. Government or criminal justice majors are typical since they involve some focus on the legal system. These are important intellectual fields. Yet, informal studies suggest that students who major in especially difficult areas, such as philosophy or mathematics, perform better on the LSAT – the exam required for entrance into law school. Just as math and logic serve lawyers well in the courtroom as they fashion their arguments, so, too, is it with chess players on the chessboard as they make their moves. 2. Requires identifying issues Students who perform well on law school exams and the bar exam must succeed at “issue spotting.” That is to say, unlike undergraduate exams, which may require the student to summarize what they have learned, law school exams require students to figure out what legal issues are buried within the facts of a given case. Then the student should apply the right legal principles to the facts. The student often must draw analogies and see patterns. Lawyers must also spot issues and draw analogies when their clients present problems. Similarly, good chess players survey the chess board, with a clock ticking, and must find a strong move among many possible candidate moves. They will look for patterns, such as typical methods of attacking a king. Sometimes, the move will be a tactical strike, such as the bold sacrifice of a queen leading to checkmate. Those players who cannot see many possibilities will not win many games. Both the chess player and lawyer must discover the key aspects of a situation. 3. Strategies essential Strong performance in law and chess involves strategizing effectively. Chess may therefore be law’s most common metaphor. Success requires the ability to plan, envision how one’s opponent will respond, and then figure out how to reply. As a former litigator, I not only had to think about what to do, but I also had to assess whether my adversary would have an effective contrary plan. I also had to know the weaknesses in my case. Similarly, a strong chess player will know the problems in their position. 4. Principles and rules apply Both law and chess have rules, general principles, and exceptions or loopholes. The law is often codified as a statute. Likewise, chess has rules, though they often lack the ambiguity of statutes. Beginning chess players then learn accepted principles. For instance, they are taught that during the opening part of the game, they should get certain pieces into play, use those pieces and pawns to control the center of the board, place their prized king in a safe position by making a special move known as “castling,” and keep moves by their valuable queen in reserve. Yet strong chess players may violate these principles, for surprise or other purposes. Prosecutors also have common approaches. In criminal cases with multiple defendants, prosecutors are trained to go after the “small fish” first, and then use those successes to land the “big fish.” This is like capturing the pawns before checkmating the king in chess. The press even uses these chess terms in describing criminal cases. 5. Takes competitive zeal Success in both law and chess requires competitive instincts. Indeed, chess has a rating system for players and law school has class rank for students. Chess requires a will to win strong enough to maintain concentration. Chess players often experience ups and downs during single games, as well as tournaments. They must cope with adversity, including losing. Similarly, a single law school exam can be the only basis for the student’s class grade, so everything is at stake at once, though the student has likely worked all semester. Lawsuits can also take years and require persistence. My cases and trials were always roller coasters with good and bad days. Another similarity is that the chess player and lawyer must be well prepared. In chess, one can often find an opponent’s games online and see their playing style. In law, one can learn about the judge who will be hearing a case and alter one’s approach accordingly. Admittedly chess is just a game so most people play it for fun, whereas practicing law is a profession. Few chess players will reach the heights of Paul Morphy. Nevertheless, as one who has played chess at high levels and litigated federal and state court cases, I believe that chess develops important intellectual, emotional and competitive skills that are very useful in the legal field.
|
|
|
LAW
Jan 29, 2021 13:30:20 GMT
Post by Admin on Jan 29, 2021 13:30:20 GMT
The Difference Between Natural Law And Man Made Lawanniehorkan.com/difference-natural-law-man-made-law/Our historical past is a repetitive story for the rise and fall of empires and kingdoms whose successes and failures have predominantly relied upon the efficiency of mental constructs by which to rule and steer humanity’s destiny. The established beliefs in which the natural world was to be dominated, feared and exploited have rendered mankind isolated and disconnected from the guiding principles innate to creation. The truth of our moral compass has been usurped in favor of a false authority whose immoral domain has left us drowning in a turbulent sea of dramas and dogmas. It should be clear by now that man’s laws are inferior to the supreme laws of creation unless man made laws are created in harmonious alignment with the truth and knowledge of natural, universal and spiritual laws. Mankind must begin to discern the difference between natural law and man made law if we are going to restore and preserve our divine evolutionary path. The guiding principles of natural law, with which you can become familiar here, provide us with the the morally correct path to co-create a loving world. Our choice to choose love over fear is backed by a universal guarantee for our attainment of true understanding with which to sustain sovereignty, freedom, harmony and order. Our vibrational alignment with the principles and truth bound within natural law is our return to the flow of creation wherein our moral compass is restored. Man made law is vulnerable to immorally incorrect and erroneous beliefs when man’s knowledge and understanding fail to harmonize with the laws of creation. For our universe operates within the wisdom of harmonic resonance, and our inability to attune with this wisdom is the cause of our separation and suffering; and the effect is our blind allegiance to the negative expressions of natural law rather than our loyalty to the positive expressions. Man’s dogmatic beliefs are rooted in mental constructs that disregard the integrity of emotional, physical and spiritual components. How do we comply with man made laws that do not consider the totality of the whole person? The laws of man confine us to an ultimatum for which our failure to comply becomes our fear of punishment. Natural laws define universal truth that transcends all race, color and creed while man’s laws attempt to restrict the right to sovereign freedom based upon one’s race, color and creed. If all men are created equal, then the creation of man made laws to suit the bias of locales or conditions is a violation of natural law. Human beings do not possess the authority to dictate written laws under the guise of moral relativism that utterly destroys one’s sovereignty and freedom. Our moral sphere is determined by our alignment to the laws of creation, not by the moral relativity bound within man’s mutable laws. We cannot trade our internal self-mastery to know right from wrong for the moral whims of external authority to dictate moral correctness from immoral incorrectness. Our ethical guidance is embedded within the eternal and immutable laws of the universe that supersedes the limitations of ever-changing moral relevancy. Natural law grants us the morally correct principles as trustworthy guidance to prevent our enslavement within immorally incorrect governance. We must heed the lost generative principle of care by which to say NO to moral relativism, and YES to the immutable laws governing the universe and all creation. Mankind has a moral obligation to check and correct the dogmatic beliefs being imposed upon them so as to defend our sovereign freedom, and to maintain the harmonious and natural order at the heart of our existence. Our moral accountability demands that we understand the difference between natural law and man made law.
|
|
|
LAW
Jan 29, 2021 13:35:09 GMT
Post by Admin on Jan 29, 2021 13:35:09 GMT
Man-made law en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-made_lawMan-made law is law that is made by humans, usually considered in opposition to concepts like natural law or divine law.[1] The European and American conception of man-made law has changed radically in the period from the Middle Ages to the present day. In the Thomistic view dominant in the Medieval period, man-made law is the lowest form of law, as a determinatio of natural law or divine positive law. In the view dominant in the modern period, man-made law is thought of as primary because it is man-made. The Soviet Union went further, not recognizing any such thing as divine or natural law. In several Islamic countries, man-made law is still considered to be subordinate to divine law.
|
|