Help with civil disobedience essay

Hi,

Currently doing a module in political theory which is compulsory in my course. Unfortunately, I don't seem to have the mindset of a political theorist and whilst i have done all the reading concerning civil disobedience, I am struggling to formulate an essay.

The question is: How might one adjudicate between an obligation to obey the law and a conflicting obligation requiring disobedience?

Any advice?

Reply 1

gjd800

The question is essentially asking how a person should decide whether or not to follow the law in a situation that is somehow morally ambiguous.

You could use something like Mill's harm condition as relating to an unjust discriminatory or persecutory governmental policy. In this case, we would have a duty to disobey the law in the interests of what is right.

Kant would also lean this way if a moral law and positive law were in conflict: one should follow the moral law even if it is to the detriment of the positive law (human-made law of the land).

Someone like Rawls would say that it is justified when the protesters can demonstrate that principles of justice between free agents have somehow not been respected by the state. The end result of all three of these perspectives is to bring about a change in the law. It's not disobedience for disobedience's sake. I suppose that is crucial.

I'm not sure revolutionary politics has much place given that the question seems to be asking how one might discern the better course in an ambiguous situation. Revolutionary scenarios are usually very cut and dry. Unless they are using obligation in two different ways, viz. as legal obligation in the first instance and as moral obligation in the second - I don't think they are.

But that's from a political philosophy perspective, so I don't know if that's too arcane for what you need.