Faulkner, Brierly, Fuller and Zinn on Order, Chaos and Law


Add to cart
Essay #: 073280
Total text length is 14,799 characters (approximately 10.2 pages).

Excerpts from the Paper

The beginning:
Faulkner, Brierly, Fuller and Zinn on Order, Chaos and Law
The object of this essay is to develop a critical comparative commentary on the statements assembled here by William Faulkner, J.L. Brierly, Lon Fuller and Howard Zinn. While each excerpt describes a unique territory of considerations, in my analysis, the excerpts bear overarching affinities in the fact that they all treat questions of the relation between chaos and order, good and evil, rationality and irrationality, and totalitarianism and democracy. In this paper I will systematically unpack and comment on each excerpt, while establishing comparisons where I see fit. Having established a robust sense of the meanings, implications, and interconnections of each statement, I will...
The end:
.....e fact of the matter is that law simply serves to justify itself. Zinn is right to question and undermine any attempt by Fuller and Brierly to suggest otherwise. Law is not absolute, nor is it good, nor is it the inevitable conclusion of reasonableness and rationality. But law will strive to suggest otherwise. Consequently, law must always be checked by democratic principles. It must be connected with its contingent and often unjust roots. Faulkner’s conception of time is as right as any other conception of time, and within it the administration of law as we know it would be more or less outright impossible. The fact is that law does not present justice to all people, but it should always be reminded of its obligation to do so.