Introduction: This response will discuss the views of sociologist Max Weber and his many theories on rationality and how it works within laws today. It will also discuss in ones own opinion if law acts rationally as Weber contends.
Max Weber, states that the primary purpose of law is to regulate the flow of human interaction. He also believed that laws can make the behavior of others predictable. One of his accepted purpose's of law is that it would support social order. I agree with Weber because behind every legal decision that is made there is always some form of reason or logic. Also it is imperative to use rationality when making decisions, this was a staple of Weber's studies. Rationality defined is basically one having sound judgment.
Weber regards the rule of law as rational, and states that any given legal norm may be established on grounds of feasibility or rational values or both, with a claim to conformity.
Expediency was also in Weber's way of thinking, one of the two main forms of rationality, and 'rational values' is the other. So what I believe Weber is saying is that law may be rational in either or both of those ways, and therefore claim obedience. Insofar as the law is rational, obedience is rational, and the rule of law is rational.
For a rational system of criminal justice to work, the punishment must be certain, swift, and proportional. . As rational, logical human beings, most would avoid committing a crime under such a system. Certainty one in which it is usually required that all offenders be punished. People would have to use their own "rationality" to decide whether or not committing a crime was worth while. Law enforcement officers and other people that work within...