No description available.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LAW AND MORALITY IN LEGAL FILMS Abstract This diploma thesis entitled "The relationship between law and morality in legal films" deals with an unusual topic written by a law student. However, legal films are being used by some teachers at law faculties to make the teaching of law more attractive. Films can also help them bring the law closer to the young generation. In this diploma thesis, law, morality and their relationship, which in filmography is most often reflected in characters of film lawyers, are viewed through legal films. The author focuses not only on how the relationship between law and morality is portrayed in legal films, but especially on how it is presented in the political and historical context of our country. Therefore, the diploma thesis is subtitled "Selected Czech and Czechoslovak legal films in the shadow of the history of our country from the 50s' of the 20th century to the present." In the first chapter, the author introduces the term "legal film" and its division into individual groups. The author also explains their meaning. The second chapter briefly discusses the concept of "law" and "morality" and how their relationship can look like not limited to legal films. The third chapter is devoted to the main characters of legal films, lawyers and their morals,...

1 Morality and law For the most of us it is quite clear what law is. Most of us have certain idea what law represents. A lot of us may have a different idea, it is because of many elements which affect our law perception. On the most basic level, law is something which is connected to specific values in society. Based on this idea we can certainly say that law is something which guarantees balance in society and system which provides safety. On the other hand, morality is a subject of a discipline called ethics. This subject represents a system which provides and protects distinctive values which have different normative quality. This system is formed by high amount of appropriate rules of behavior and its way to realize this behavior. In the past, the connection between these two systems was very important, it was a noticeable fact that these two systems cooperate and communicate. Even though nowadays these systems are more and more divided, they still interact. In the law of Czech Republic the connection between morality and law can be observed especially in the good manners. Good manners are intentions which are projected throughout the whole law system. The main goal of good manners and morality is to fill the gaps in the law. Another important goal is also to straighten the perception of justice in the...

1 Morality and law For the most of us it is quite clear what law is. Most of us have certain idea what law represents. A lot of us may have a different idea, it is because of many elements which affect our law perception. On the most basic level, law is something which is connected to specific values in society. Based on this idea we can certainly say that law is something which guarantees balance in society and system which provides safety. On the other hand, morality is a subject of a discipline called ethics. This subject represents a system which provides and protects distinctive values which have different normative quality. This system is formed by high amount of appropriate rules of behavior and its way to realize this behavior. In the past, the connection between these two systems was very important, it was a noticeable fact that these two systems cooperate and communicate. Even though nowadays these systems are more and more divided, they still interact. In the law of Czech Republic the connection between morality and law can be observed especially in the good manners. Good manners are intentions which are projected throughout the whole law system. The main goal of good manners and morality is to fill the gaps in the law. Another important goal is also to straighten the perception of justice in the...

Diploma thesis aims to present different conceptions of legal consciousness, to highlight their historical and socio-cultural contexts and to outline their possible progress in selected directions. First chapter presents several textbook definitions of legal consciousness, including a comparison of "European" and "American" conceptions. Chapter 2 introduces and compares other expressions usually used in connection with legal consciousness - sometimes as synonyms, sometimes emphasizing some of its components or specific author's approach. Chapter 3 then accentuates historical dimension of legal consciousness, with examples of its ideological conceptions "with attributes" (socialist, revolutionary, popular legal consciousness). These three chapters constitute descriptive, overviewing part; possible synthesis is then concluded in Chapter 4. At first, it identifies three "inner" dimensions which arise from presented conceptual field and which need to be clarified if we want to talk about legal consciousness with sufficient precision: which component we focus on, which part of law and whose legal consciousness are concerned. After that we distinguish three kinds of discourse, that is, how the legal consciousness is talked about: lawyers, sociologists and educators or "users of law" approach it with different...

Diplomová práce se zabývá vztahem práva a morálky v iusnaturalismu a iuspozitivismu, přičemž poukazuje na různé významové konotace pojmů právo a morálka. Naznačuje historický vývoj obou směrů až do období dvacátého století a u dílčích období vývoje uvádí i významné představitele, a to včetně jejich hlavních filosofických myšlenek. Těžiště práce však spočívá ve srovnání přístupů a pojetí vztahu práva a morálky v koncepcích významných právních filosofů H. L. A. Harta a R. M. Dworkina. Oba muži bývají považováni za představitele zmíněných směrů a jejich názorový střet lze pokládat za jeden z nejvýraznějších momentů ve filosofii práva druhé poloviny dvacátého století. Práce se tak detailně věnuje problematice práva a morálky nejprve u H. L. A. Harta a následně pak u R. M. Dworkina. Snaží se předložit základy jejich právních tezí, charakterizovat přístup k chápání morálky a v neposlední řadě také popsat již výše zmiňovaný vztah dvou normativních systémů - práva a morálky. Diplomová práce vychází ze studia řady pramenů, jako jsou monografie, učebnice, sborníky, články odborných časopisů či internetové zdroje. Klíčovými se však mezi použitými zdroji stala především díla obou právních filosofů, která umožnila pochopit jejich rozdílná stanoviska k problematice práva a morálky. Pro naplnění stanovených cílů...

The purpose of this review of literature is to investigate the various roles of video surveillance (VS) in the hospital's intensive care unit (ICU) as well as its legal and ethical implications. Today, hospitals spend more money on the ICU than on any other unit. By 2030, the population of those 65 and over is expected to double. 80% of older adults have at least one chronic diseases (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2013). As a consequence, the demand for ICU services will likely increase, which may burden hospital with additional costs. Because of increasing economic pressures, more hospitals are using video surveillance to enhance quality care and reduce ICU costs (Goran, 2012). Research shows that VS enhances positive outcomes among patients and best practice compliance among hospital staff. The results are fewer reports of patient complications and days spent in the ICU, and an increase in reported hospital savings. In addition, VS is becoming an important tool for the families of newborns in the neonatal ICU (NICU). The belief is that the VS can facilitate parent-baby bonding. In the United States of America, privacy rights impose legal restrictions on VS. These rights come from the U.S. Constitution, Statutory law, Regulatory law, and State law. HIPPA authorizes the patient to control the use and disclosure of his or her health information. Accordingly, hospitals are under obligation to inform patients on their right to protected health information. It is appropriate that hospitals use VS for diagnostic purposes as long as they have obtained patient consent. According to modern day privacy experts Charles Fried and Alan Westin, a violation of a person's privacy equates a violation on their liberty and morality. However, if a physician suspects that a third party person is causing harm to the patient, than the use of covert VS is justifiable.

本論文總共分為三部分，共八章。 第一部份是「分離命題綜論」，包含了第一、二章。在第一章當中，筆者從歷史及分析的路徑，對分離命題做了一個初步的介紹。歷史的部分，筆者選取邊沁與奧斯丁、美國法現實主義、德國自然法復興運動這三個對於英美法理學界來說較為重要的關於分離命題的討論。在分析的部分，筆者簡單地說明分離命題與法概念以及道德概念的關係。當然，筆者也介紹了本文所探討的主角—德沃京的生平、其學說的發展以及其學說與分離命題的關係。第二章則是特別針對德沃京最主要的理論對手哈特的法理論以及他對分離命題的主張。第一章與第二章一起，才算是完成本文的預備工作。 第二部分是德沃京前期對分離命題的批判。本文將德沃京前期與後期區分開來，是因為德沃京學說的前期與後期都有很大的影響力，可是他後期的理論所使用的語彙有經過相當的修正，因此不適合放在一起介紹。第二部分包括第三、四章，筆者分別名之為「原則論I」與「原則論II」。這是因為德沃京前期的法理論是以「原則」概念為主軸所發展出來的。第三章主要是對德沃京《認真看待權利》一書中《規則模式I》一章的介紹。第四章則是對《規則模式II》以及疑難案件這兩章的介紹。《規則模式I》是德沃京整個法理論的出發點。它本身構成一個完整的整體，儘管仍是一個有待發展的整體。《規則模式II》是對《規則模式I》的補充。疑難案件則是德沃京法理論的突破性發展，許多他在後期完整發展的觀念都可以在這篇文章中看到雛形。筆者將《規則模式II》及疑難案件中的重點一起放入第四章作為對於第三章的補充。這些一起構成了德沃京前期的完整面貌。當然，筆者用以貫穿其中的軸線，就是德沃京對分離命題的批判。 第三部份是德沃京後期對分離命題之批判。這一部份主要焦點是在德沃京集大成的系統著作法律帝國。這一部份包括第五、六、七章。第五章說明了德沃京後期修正過後的概念架構，以及在這個新的概念架構與分離命題的關係是什麼。處理的對象是法律帝國的第一章。第六章則是對德沃京「詮釋」概念的闡釋。「詮釋」概念是德沃京後期理論的核心，因此我們有必要對之清楚地說明。顯得比較突兀的是第六章的第一節。筆者從社會科學方法論的角度分析了哈特與德沃京法理論在方法上的意涵。這是因為，筆者認為分離命題的焦點乃是在於法理論家如何看待法概念，若要深入地評估法理論的意涵，勢必要探討其方法。這個部分處理的對象主要是法律帝國的第二、三章。第七章則介紹德沃京後期法理論的重點，也就是他認為的法概念的「構念」--作為整全性的法律。 最後，也就是第八章是結論。這是筆者對全篇論文的回顧，以及筆者對於分離命題這個主題的價值的看法。 第一部 分離命題綜論 第 一 章 緒 論 第一節 分離命題概論I—歷史的路徑 第一項 邊沁與奧斯丁 第二項 法現實主義者的挑戰 第三項 德國自然法復興運動 第二節 分離命題概論II—分析的路徑 第一項 法概念 第一款 規範取向的法概念與非規範取向的法概念 第二款 法概念的指涉與理論說明 第二項 道德概念 第三節 德沃京的法理論與分離命題 第一項 德沃京生平簡介 第二項 德沃京的法理論發展及其分期 第三項 本文問題意識：德沃京法理論與分離命題 第四節 本 論 文 架 構 第 二 章 哈特與分離命題 第一節 從定義到核心要素 第一項 定義 第二項 組織性原則與一組核心要素 第二節 哈特的法概念與分離命題 第一項 初級規則與次級規則的結合 第二項 個別法律的效力 第三項 法體系的存在 第四項 個案中的法律 第三節 哈 特 法 理 論 的 性 質 第一項 一般性 第二項 描述性 第三項 一般性、描述性與分離命題 第二部 德沃京前期對法實證主義分離命題之批判 第 三 章 原 則 論 ( I ) 第一節 德沃京的論證 第一項 原則是存在的 第二項 原則與規則邏輯性質的差異 第三項 原則也是法規範 第四項 原則無法被承認規則鑑別出來 第一款 妥當感 第二款 制度上的佐證 第三款 習慣法的問題 第五項 原則是某種道德 第二節 原則是什麼？ 第一項 原則的功能 第一款 原則的五種功能 第二款 原則之功能的省思 第二項 原則的來源 第三節 規則與原則的邏輯性質差異是否成立？ 第一項 如何判斷是規則或原則？ 第二項 規則衝突則失效？ 第三項 規則與原則之區分的理論意涵 第四節 原則是不是法規範 ？ 第五節 原則與道德的關係是什麼？ 第 四 章 原 則 論 （II） 第一節 對承認規則的批判 第一項 哈特的社會規則論 第二項 對社會規則論的批判 第一款 社會規則與規範規則 第二款 「自主而合意的道德」與「從眾而成習的道德」 第三款 疑難情況的出現 第三項 對作為社會規則之承認規則的批判 第 二 節 權 利 論 第一項 權利 第一款 權利與目標 第二款 幾種權利的分類 第二項 法律權利 第一款 規範與價值 第二款 作為權利執行者的司法部門 第三款 政治理論 第三項 權利與道德 第三節 對裁量論的批判 第一項 德沃京對司法裁量論的批判 第一款 弱意義與強意義的裁量 第二款 法實證主義者的裁量論 第二項 對司法裁量論之批判的理論意涵 第三部 德沃京後期對法實證主義分離命題之批判 第 五 章 新的起點：新的法概念 第一節 新的概念架構 第一項 關於法律的理論爭議 第二項 法律命題與法律根據 第三項 新的法概念 第二節 疑難案件的實例 第三節 單純事實觀點 第四節 語意學的刺 第一項 法的語義學理論 第二項 法實證主義 第三項 語義學的刺 第五節 小結：新的起點 第 六 章 詮釋性的法概念 第一節 社會科學方法論上的批判 第一項 法理論的自我理解 第二項 作為受制於規則之活動的法律言說 第一款 語言遊戲與說話行動 第二款 哈特的困境 第三項 一般性與描述性法理論之困難 第一款 一般性 第二款 描述性 第四項 詮釋性的法理論 第二節 建構詮釋論 第一項 建構性詮釋 第一款 一個虛構的例子 第二款 對話性詮釋、科學性詮釋與創造性詮釋 第三款 建構性詮釋 第二項 對社會實踐的建構性詮釋 第一款 詮釋的三個階段 第二款 概念、構念與典範 第三節 詮釋性的法概念 第 七 章 整全的法律 第一節 成規主義與法實用主義 第一項 成規主義 第二項 法實用主義 第二節 整 全 性 第一項 整全性符合嗎？ 第二項 整全性有吸引力嗎？ 第一款 真正的社群 第二款 政治社群 第三節 整全的法律 第一項 連環小說 第二項 海克力斯法官 第三項 法律與道德 第四節 懷疑論的挑戰 第八章 結 論 參 考 文 獻 / Abstract This master dissertation elaborates the leading anti-positivist Ronald Dworkin’s standing on critique of the separation thesis, the positivist doctrine that law and morality are separate, or ‘what law is’ is different from ‘what law ought to be’. The author firstly argues that although the dispute over the separation thesis in the old context, which mainly concerns with the relationship between legal validity and morality, no longer stands in the central spotlight, the recent heating concern with the role morality plays in legal reasoning is actually a continuance of the old-time concern. The overarching rationale behind these developments is a battle about where and how to base the objectivity of law in the modern world. Therefore, despite that Dworkin’s legal theory has focused on the part morality plays in legal reasoing, it could still be elaborated as a critique of separation thesis in a broader sense. This dissertation distinguishes ‘early Dworkin’ and ‘later Dworkin’s’ critique of the separation thesis. ‘Early Dworkin’ means Dworkin’s legal theory in Taking Right Seriously. ‘:Later Dworkin’ means Dworkin’s legal theory in Law’s Empire. While the author thinks the essence of Dworkin’s legal theory remained basically the same throughout his early and later thoughts, it is necessary to introduce his theory in two parts because the concepts he used were greatly changed and improved, and the arguments shifted. Dworkin’s early critique of separation thesis is organized around the concept of ‘principle’. The author argues that the most important argument Dworkin should be making is not that principles exist, but that principles are ‘law’ and that principles cannot be identified by the rule of recognition. And these two arguments are not to be cleared up only until Dworkin’s later argument using the concept of ‘interpretation’. The author also criticizes Hart’s claim that the nature of legal theory could fruitfully remain general and descriptive. By surveying the development of the methodology of social science, the author argues that Hart’s standing on the nature of legal theory reveals his ultimate philosophical foundation of empiricism and positivism. The author therefore argues that a fruitful gain a legal theory is to get, it has to be particular and ‘interpretive’, as Dworkin has claimed.