Moral Combat: The Dilemma of Legal Perspectivalism(Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and Law)

This book explores the thesis that legal roles force people to engage in moral combat, an idea which is implicit in the assumption that citizens may be morally required to disobey unjust laws, while judges may be morally required to punish citizens for civil disobedience. Heidi Hurd advances the surprising argument that the law cannot require us to do what morality forbids. The 'role-relative' understanding of morality is shown to be incompatible with both consequentialist and deontological moral philosophies. In the end, Hurd shows that our best moral theory is one which never makes one actor's moral success turn on another's moral failure. Moral Combat is a sophisticated, well-conceived and carefully argued book on a very important and controversial topic at the junction between legal and political philosophy. It will be of interest to moral, legal, and political philosophers, as well as teachers and students of professional ethics in law.

Table of Contents:
Preface; Acknowledgments; Part I. The Dilemma of Legal Perspectivalism: 1. The incompatibility of weak retributivism, the rule of law, and the separation of powers; Part II. Sources of the Dilemma of Legal Perspectivalism: 2. The rejection of moral relativism; 3. The indefensibility of practical authority; 4. The failure of influential authority; 5. The limits of advisory authority; 6. A defense of theoretical authority; Part III. The Moral Case for Legal Perspectivalism: 7. Practical errors: pragmatic foundations for perspectivalism; 8. The rule of law values: principled foundations for judicial perspectivalism; 9. The values of democracy and the separation of powers: principled foundations for constitutional perspectivalism; Part IV. The Moral Case Against Legal Perspectivalism: 10. Consequentialism and moral correspondence; 11. Deontology and moral correspondence; Part V. Resolving the Dilemma of Legal Perspectivalism: 12. Legal practices without moral combat; Bibliography.

Review :
"[Hurd's] book is admirably systematic, rigorous, clear, informed, and reasonable." Ethics "Hurd's book brings many important issues in moral, political, and legal philosophy together in a structured way...I found Moral Combat to be rich and have prompted reflection." Thaddeus Metz, The Philosophical Review "This striking and challenging book lays out as persuasive a case as can be made against the view that citizens and legal officials should elevate legal roles over moral commitments and in favor of the view that democracy and the rule of law are not well served by what Hurd calls the moral perspectivist point of view. This book makes an especially powerful case against the view that it is right to punish those who are morally innocent in order to advance or preserve institutional values. Philosophers, lawyers, and others committed to the humanistic study of law will find much of value in Hurd's thorough review of the arguments in favor of treating law as authoritative when it conflicts with morality. Hurd's book is destined to become a landmark in the field. Highly recommended for upper-division undergraduates, graduate students, faculty, and practitioners." Choice "This volume by a professor of law and philosophy explores the thesis that legal roles force people to engage in moral combat, since citizens may be morally required to disobey unjust laws and judges may be morally required to punish citizens for civil disobedience." Ethics, Law, and Aging Review