“Law” As A Mind Trick

About half the time it is used, the word “law” is fairly close to a mind trick, and there is nothing noble, righteous, or even ‘conservative’ in that. More or less all of us were pushed into the trick, which complicates things because people don’t like to admit anything that smells like a mistake. Having been taught, repeatedly, to “respect the law,” nearly all of us have decided certain things must be right, simply because they were “the law.” We decided this, not because we understood the benefits that would follow certain actions, but because of repetitive prodding. And so it’s important to be clear on this: To uncritically, reflexively obey is not respect. Respect requires understanding. Our habitual obedience, as it happens, came largely from intimidation: Obey, or else teacher will shame you; the other kids will laugh at you; important people will criticize you in public. Please note all of these are primitive, degrading reasons, but they were thrust upon us as children and they very often stuck. The really damaging part, however, comes after you obey out of fear: when you justify your past actions. Again, not many of us enjoy admitting our errors, but if we want to become honest, conscious adults, that is precisely what we need to do. There’s Law, and Then There’s Law In the modern West, particularly in the US, there are two different kinds of law (common law and statute law). Unfortunately they are usually rolled up together and placed under a single tag. That’s a major part of this problem. If the early days of Western civilization, law was simply the process of determining what was just. Law was considered good if it were reasonable, fair, and had stood the test of time. And that’s all. Law, in the old days, was developed locally, and judges were simply trusted men who reasoned well. The form we in the English-speaking world know best was the common law of England, and it was precisely this type of law. In fact, the historical record shows early English kings having to adopt customary law. To understand how law based on reason and experience turned into what we have now, this needs to be grasped:

Until recent times, law was not legislation.

I know this is contrary to what you’ve understood, but it’s true all the same. Legislation is primarily a modern invention. Law in the old days was not made by politicians or even by princes (those were edicts). Law was, as we said above, the process of determining what was just. The common law was created and updated by judges, not by legislators. To buttress this point, consider that when English philosopher Jeremy Bentham died in 1832, he was revered as “the founder of modern legislation.” I won’t belabor this point, but consider these two statements, please:

Legislation displaces law that is based upon reason and experience.

Legislation is the edict of politicians.

Under legislation, reason and experience are not required. Politicians create this type of law and can change it on a whim. So… Is it sensible to worship the words of people we also condemn? And if we hold those words above critical thought, are we not holding them above reality? Is that not a kind of idolatry? We idolized law because we were trained to, of course, but we’re adults now; we should correct the errors of our youth. The law of reason and experience always stands, simply because it is reasonable and useful. An uncritical respect for legislation, on the other hand, requires us to bypass our minds and sacrifice our will. ** Please see The Law & Its Cycle. ** Paul Rosenberg freemansperspective.com

READ MORE