That is an esteem that dependably gives you a superior notoriety. Integrity respectability demonstrates your actual character. It uncovers such a great amount of you without you regularly saying a word. Individuals dependably acknowledge activities that are conceived of uprightness. I imagine that where it counts we as a whole need to have great esteems.
In International Relations, there are many theories that explain events and state behaviour from different perspectives. These theories help us to understand the world which we live in. Certain theories have been popular at different times to explain the phenomenon of the international order. New theories emerge to replace old ones that no longer have the ability to explain the current global conditions to the fullest extent. Realism has been the most long-standing and well accepted theory in the academic community, however even it has separate streams of the theory.
“Cogito ergo sum,” or in layman 's terms, “I think therefore I am.” This statement is possibly one of the most famous latin quotes of all times, said by René Descartes himself. Descartes was one the great french philosophers, mathematicians and scientists in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. Outlandish to some and inventive to others, his theories shaped the way we view psychology today and set him apart from other philosophers and scientists at that time. Maybe an oddity to us humans now, but at the time his work was revolutionary and extraordinary. Descartes was an exceptional man, who wrote many engaging and thought provoking books.
He was the first man to create the British-style poetry, and he made great contributions to the history of English literature. The British and the world's writers are highly rated for Chaucer. Because of that he not only opened the British Elizabethan literature path, but also affected the later British literary writers. The change and evolution of his personal style can be seen from Chaucer's representative works. In the mature period Chaucer is not only to create his own unique style works, but also to use this unique style to open the Elizabethan period of literary peak.
Durkheim says that law, solidarity and sanction are intrinsically connected to each other. It is almost as if they form a triad where each is affected by and affects the other two. If solidarity is how people relate to each other, then law determines how these solidarities are to be regulated and sanction tells what happens if the solidarity is less or more than required. Solidarity, according to Durkheim, is an abstraction and it is only through law that it gets its meaning. That is not to say that law has an impact on solidarity but that law and solidarity go hand in hand, as a process.
The fact that the person has breached a rule of law is thought to be crucial to justifying the outcome that the person should be sanctioned. Simmonds says that this ordinary understanding we have of the way law is invoked by judges to justify sanctions cannot be understood simply by reference to Hart’s idea of a master rule of recognition, which could be followed by officials for any reasons whatever. It would not be intelligible, Simmonds claims, for a judge to offer, as a justification for a sanction, the fact that a person has breached a rule, which is identified by a rule (the rule of recognition), which the judge follows purely for, say, selfish or malicious reasons. Rather, the practice of invoking the law as a justification for a sanction only makes sense if the status of a rule as one of law is thought by the person invoking it to have some moral significance. So, implicit in our ordinary understanding of law, according to Simmonds, is the idea that law has some special moral quality that could justify imposing sanctions on a citizen.
The doctrine of binding precedent is restricted to common law legal systems, yet is integral to their operation. Being that body of law found in the decisions of the courts, common law depends for its application and development upon the ability of judges to locate and follow the decisions reached by courts in previous cases sharing the same material facts as those of the cases currently before them. The doctrine of binding precedent operates by reference to the hierarchy of the courts,' which generally means that courts are obliged to follow relevant decisions of those courts which sit above them in the court hierarchy. It is important to note that while taken for granted within common law systems, binding precedent is alien to civil law jurisdictions.
In a nutshell, legal tradition is the basis or historical root of a country’s legal system. There are two major legal traditions – the Common law and Civil law traditions. Each tradition has different source, concept, rule and development history. The adoptions of legal traditions in certain countries are largely affected by their historical background as well. John Henry Merryman (as cited in O’Connor, 2012, p.8) defined “legal tradition” as “a set deep rooted, historically conditioned attitudes about the nature of law, about the role of law in the society….
Lord Denning started his reflection on Equity’s role with the examination of the relation between law and society: when the rules are given the force of law, they must be obeyed because they are law and not because people accept and agree with the reasons on which they are founded. It is important to understand that the rule is the rule and not the reason for it. A reason can cease to be valid, but the rule will still be
With reference to precedent the courts in their decisions sometimes applied English doctrines, particularly in the areas of the law of contract and delict. The reason for this is that many judges and lawyers received their initial legal education at English Universities such as Oxford and Cambridge. They were therefore mainly acquainted with English law. They found the application of the old authorities on Roman-Dutch law which were written in either Latin or Dutch problematic. The influence of English law provoked a debate among South African jurists and they split into two camps being the modernists and the purists.