However, the question arises, if a fixed set of principles are used to determine the just outcome, in what way would this differ from laws?
The difference is that the “order of custom” would prevail rather than the “rule of law”. Custom is a body of living institutions that enjoys the support of the body politic, whereas law is a codified (read dead) body of institutions that separates social control from moral force. This, as anyone observing modern Western society can testify, alienates everyone. A just outcome is the predictable, but not necessarily the inevitable outcome of interpersonal conflict because in a traditional anarchistic society people are trusted to do it themselves. Anarchists think people have to grow up in a social environment free from the confusions generated by a fundamental discrepancy between morality, and social control, to fully appreciate the implications. However, the essential ingredient is the investment of trust, by the community, in people to come up with functional solutions to interpersonal conflict. This stands in sharp contrast with the present situation of people being infantilised by
Related Questions
- What standard will be used to determine whether injured patients receive compensation? How does the avoidability standard differ from negligence?
- How does the study design to determine the Ki and the kinetic parameters of inactivation, kinact and KI, differ from that used to determine IC50?
- However, the question arises, if a fixed set of principles are used to determine the just outcome, in what way would this differ from laws?
