Appeal to the Law
Last updated
Last updated
Appeals to the law are informally fallacious. They argue that something is ethical simply because it is legal. However, this is problematic for a variety of reasons: 1. This also necessarily argues that all things that have ever been legal were ethical. There are many legal things done in the past that most people now consider highly unethical. 2. There are also many laws that have conflicted with each other, so to argue they were both simultaneously dictators of ethics is incoherent. 3. It's also worth noting that while morality has some influence on legislation, legislation should not decide our morals. (At least, not with most common ethical frameworks.) An example in a vegan context that demonstrates this point: p1: Slavery used to be legal in the US in the 1800s p2: We now understand that slavery is highly unethical c: Therefore, what is legal is different from what is ethical, because our understanding grows over time and laws must be updated p1: Animal agriculture is currently legal in the US today p2: Something being legal does not necessarily make it ethical c: Therefore, animal agriculture is not necessarily ethical even though it is legal, for the same reason as we inferred with slavery - our understanding grows over time and laws must be updated The takeaway is that the legality of animal agriculture is an irrelevant factor to whether or not it is ethical. If you are concerned about this comparison, see this article on comparing vs equating: