Comprehension
A thought-provoking book titled ‘The Morality of Law’ by Lon L. Fuller on moral philosophy insists on a distinction between ‘morality of aspiration’ and ‘morality of duty’. From the view of the morality of aspiration, the human conduct does not bear on mandatory rules but on conceptions of the ‘Good Life’, of ‘what beseems a human being functioning at his best to human capacities’. Because no law can compel a man to live up to the excellence of which he is capable. But for workable standards of judgment, the morality of duty lays down the basic rules without which an ordered society directed towards certain specific goals must fail of its mark. Because the duty ties it very closely to what is ‘rationally discoverable’ and ‘objective’, as contrasted with the morality of aspiration based on subjectivism. However, moralists may differ as to what range of conduct should fall within the respective spheres of duty and the morality of aspirations. “When we are passing a judgment of moral duty, it seems absurd to say that such a duty can in some way flow directly from knowledge of a situation of fact.” As due to the fact that before we conclude ‘that a duty ought to exist’, however well we may understand the facts, by the close connection between understanding a person’s ideals, approval and disapproval. Does this mean that duties are rationally discoverable, and a matter of choice, even if not of ‘ineffable preference’? Presumably not, since when we pass a moral judgment of duty ‘ought’ to exist. It is necessary to distinguish between the accepted morality of a social group and the personal morality of individuals. ‘Duty’ may appear in all of these, but the satisfaction is very often a matter of degree varying from situation to situation. The rule of a morality of duty is necessary for social living. The morality of aspiration provides a general idea of the perfection we ought to acquire it. If we consider the whole range of moral issues, we may imagine a yardstick which begins at the bottom with the most obvious demands of social living and extends upward to the highest reaches of human aspirations. Somewhere along this scale an invisible pointer marks the dividing line where the pressure of duty leaves off and the challenge of excellence begins. The whole field of moral argument is an undeclared war over the location of this pointer. Whom we regard as being moralistic are always trying to inch the pointer upward so as to expand the area of duty and they bludgeon us into a belief that we are duty bound to embrace this pattern of human conduct, instead of making us realize a pattern of life they consider worthy of human nature
Question: 1
Which of the following statements regarding the ‘morality of aspiration’ is untrue?
Which of the following statements regarding the ‘morality of aspiration’ is untrue?
Updated On: Aug 14, 2025
- The morality of aspiration is based on inevitable rules for ordered social living.
- The morality of aspiration impulses towards the perfection and excellence.
- The law cannot regulate the morality of aspiration because it is subjective in nature.
- The law cannot compel a man to adhere to the best of his human capabilities.
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The question asks us to identify which statement regarding the 'morality of aspiration' is untrue. To find the correct answer, we need to understand the concept of 'morality of aspiration' as distinguished by Lon L. Fuller in his book 'The Morality of Law'.
The morality of aspiration is characterized by the following:
- It is driven by ideals, aims for excellence, and focuses on what constitutes a 'Good Life'.
- It is subjective, and not governed by enforceable rules or laws. Laws cannot regulate it because it is tied to individual notions of human excellence.
- It suggests personal fulfillment and perfection and extends beyond the basic duties required for ordered social living.
Given the provided options, we analyze them as follows:
- The morality of aspiration is based on inevitable rules for ordered social living.
Analysis: This is untrue. Morality of aspiration is subjective and not about inevitable rules, which pertains to morality of duty. - The morality of aspiration impulses towards the perfection and excellence.
Analysis: This is true as it aligns with the aim for personal accomplishment and excellence. - The law cannot regulate the morality of aspiration because it is subjective in nature.
Analysis: This aligns with the subjective nature of morality of aspiration. - The law cannot compel a man to adhere to the best of his human capabilities.
Analysis: This is true, as it involves the pursuit of excellence which laws cannot enforce.
Therefore, the untrue statement regarding the morality of aspiration is: The morality of aspiration is based on inevitable rules for ordered social living.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2
The rules for morality of duty command:
The rules for morality of duty command:
Updated On: Aug 14, 2025
- To conduct best to human capacity.
- To conduct necessary for self-survival.
- To conduct equally as others’ conduct.
- To conduct necessary for social living.
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
The concept of "The morality of duty" as discussed by Lon L. Fuller pertains to the framework of moral philosophy, distinguishing it from the "morality of aspiration." According to Fuller, the morality of duty focuses on establishing essential rules needed for an orderly society directed toward certain specific goals. This framework is objective and rationally discoverable, aiming to form the foundation upon which societal regulations are built. In contrast to the more subjective morality of aspiration, which involves personal ideals and the pursuit of human excellence, the morality of duty addresses what is imperative for social coexistence.
Within the context of Fuller’s argument, the term "morality of duty" implies adherence to the basic principles required for social living. These standards are not merely a matter of personal choice or subjective preference but are necessary for the orderly functioning of society. Therefore, when evaluating the provided options regarding the rules for the morality of duty, the most suitable choice is:
To conduct necessary for social living.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3
Consider the statements:
(I) ;The moralistic philosophy always strives to encroach into the area of morality of aspiration to bring it as duty for the social living.
(II) The moralistic philosophers compel us to embrace the pattern of human conduct, instead of making us realize a pattern of life that is worthy of human nature.
Choose the correct answer from the code given below
Consider the statements:
(I) ;The moralistic philosophy always strives to encroach into the area of morality of aspiration to bring it as duty for the social living.
(II) The moralistic philosophers compel us to embrace the pattern of human conduct, instead of making us realize a pattern of life that is worthy of human nature.
Choose the correct answer from the code given below
(I) ;The moralistic philosophy always strives to encroach into the area of morality of aspiration to bring it as duty for the social living.
(II) The moralistic philosophers compel us to embrace the pattern of human conduct, instead of making us realize a pattern of life that is worthy of human nature.
Choose the correct answer from the code given below
Updated On: Aug 14, 2025
- Both (I) and (II) are true.
- Both (I) and (II) are untrue.
- (I) is true and (II) is untrue.
- (II) is true and (I) is untrue.
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
Based on the provided comprehension and the philosophical discussion about 'morality of aspiration' and 'morality of duty' from Lon L. Fuller's work, let's evaluate the statements:
- The first statement suggests that moralistic philosophy often attempts to transform aspirations into duties for societal living. According to the context, moralists aim to shift the focus towards making the objectives of a good life equivalent to duties, thus expanding the realm of what is considered a moral obligation. This aligns with their effort to move the invisible pointer on the moral yardstick upwards, integrating more aspirations into the bracket of duties.
- The second statement deals with the moralists compelling adherence to set patterns of behavior, bludgeoning individuals into accepting these as duties rather than realizing the inherent worth of human nature in such conduct. Again, the comprehension mentions that moralists focus on imposing these patterns as duties rather than fostering a realization of worthy human pursuits.
In conclusion, both statements (I) and (II) correctly align with the essence of the comprehension, making both statements true.
| Correct Answer: | Both (I) and (II) are true. |
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4
Which of the following element is not required for the formation of decision regarding a moral duty?
Which of the following element is not required for the formation of decision regarding a moral duty?
Updated On: Aug 14, 2025
- Rationality
- Objectivity
- Subjectivity
- Knowledge regarding the circumstances
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
In the context of determining moral duties, several elements play crucial roles. According to Lon L. Fuller's philosophy discussed in 'The Morality of Law', moral duty is significantly tied to rationality and objectivity.
- Rationality: Essential for making decisions that are logically coherent and consistent with established moral duties.
- Objectivity: Important for ensuring that decisions are not biased by personal feelings and align with societal norms and the duties expected within.
- Knowledge regarding the circumstances: Critical for understanding the context in which a duty is being assessed, allowing for an informed decision.
- Subjectivity: Unlike the other elements, subjectivity does not play a necessary role in the formation of decisions regarding a moral duty. It relies on personal feelings and opinions rather than on the rational objectivity required for such decisions.
Thus, from the given options, subjectivity is the element that is not required for decision-making regarding moral duties, as decisions should be based on unbiased rationality and objectively understood facts rather than personal biases.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5
The concept of duty as characterised by Lon L. Fuller seems
The concept of duty as characterised by Lon L. Fuller seems
Updated On: Aug 14, 2025
- Dynamic
- Static
- Personal
- Fictional
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
In evaluating Lon L. Fuller's concept of duty as portrayed in his work "The Morality of Law," it is vital to understand the contrast he makes between the "morality of aspiration" and the "morality of duty." These concepts help define how duty operates within a societal context:
- Fuller describes the "morality of duty" as a set of basic rules essential for an orderly society to function effectively. This establishes a system that is objective and rationally discoverable, providing a structured approach to societal obligations.
- The "morality of aspiration," on the other hand, deals with the ideals and the notion of achieving excellence in human behavior, a realm that law cannot enforce but which guides personal growth and virtues.
- Given the dynamic nature of societal obligations and legal structures, Fuller suggests that duties fluctuate with the context, evolving as societies change. This contrasts with a static view where duties would remain unchanged regardless of societal progressions.
- Therefore, Fuller's characterization of duty represents a dynamic approach. This underscores how duty adapts with ongoing societal changes and individual circumstances, reinforcing the applicability of duty as not fixed but rather responsive to the needs and developments of the social order.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 6
Which of the following statements is not true?
Which of the following statements is not true?
Updated On: Aug 14, 2025
- ‘Morality of duty’ is non-obligatory.
- ‘Morality of duty’ is obligatory.
- Rules of ‘morality of aspiration’ are a challenge to human conduct.
- Human excellence is the end of ‘morality of aspiration’.
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
In Lon L. Fuller's exploration of moral philosophy in "The Morality of Law," there exists a critical distinction between 'morality of aspiration' and 'morality of duty'.
The 'morality of aspiration' refers to ideals related to the 'Good Life', emphasizing human excellence and what constitutes a human being operating at their highest potential. The rules associated with 'morality of aspiration' are not obligatory but rather serve as challenges to elevate human conduct to a pinnacle of excellence.
Conversely, 'morality of duty' comprises essential and obligatory rules that ensure order within society. These rules are grounded in a rational understanding of what is necessary for a societal structure to function effectively.
Evaluating the provided statements against this philosophical framework:
- ‘Morality of duty’ is non-obligatory. - This statement is not true. The 'morality of duty' is characterized by its obligatory nature, setting baseline standards for society.
- ‘Morality of duty’ is obligatory.
- Rules of ‘morality of aspiration’ are a challenge to human conduct.
- Human excellence is the end of ‘morality of aspiration’.
The statement "‘Morality of duty’ is non-obligatory" contradicts the essence of 'morality of duty', making it the false statement among the options.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top Questions on Jurisprudence
- According to Henry Maine, “The movement of progressive societies has hitherto been a movement from ___________”.
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- The solidary obligation imposes ___________ liability in law.
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- Which prominent jurist has developed the Will Theory of Rights?
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- As per the definition given by John Austin, ownership is a right unrestricted in point of ______.
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
- A precedent given per incuriam is _______________.
- TS PGLCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Jurisprudence
View More Questions
Questions Asked in CLAT PG exam
- The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Nil Ratan Kundu and another v. Abhijit Kundu’ 2008(3) Apex Court Judgements 232 (SC), while granting the custody to the maternal grandparents observed: In our judgement, the law relating to custody of a child is fairly well settled and it is this. In deciding a difficult and complex question as to custody of minor, a Court of law should keep in mind relevant statutes and the rights flowing therefrom. But such cases cannot be decided solely by interpreting legal provisions. It is a humane problem in live in relationship and is required to be solved with human touch. A Court while dealing with custody cases, is neither bound by statutes nor by strict rules of evidence or procedure nor by precedents. In selecting proper guardian of a minor, the paramount consideration should be the welfare and well-being of the child. In selecting a guardian, the Court is exercising parens patriae jurisdiction and is expected, may bound, to give due weight to a child’s ordinary comfort, contentment, health, education, intellectual development and favorable surroundings. But over and above physical comforts, moral and ethical values cannot be ignored. They are equally, or we may say, even more important, essential and indispensable consideration. If the minor is old enough to form an intelligent preference or judgement, the Court must consider such preference as well, though the final decision should rest with the Court as to what is conducive to the welfare of the minor.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Gaurav Nagpal v. Semedha Nagpal’-(2009)1 SCC 42, while giving paramount importance to the welfare of the child, which should include moral and ethical values, besides ethical well-being, observed as under:
When the court is confronted with conflicting demands made by the parents, each time it has to justify the demands. The Court has not only to look at the issue on legalistic basis, in such matters human angles are relevant for deciding those issues. The Court then does not give emphasis on what the parties say, it has to exercise a jurisdiction which is aimed at the welfare of the minor. As observed recently in Mausami Moitra Ganguli case, the Court has to give due weightage to the child’s ordinary contentment, health, education, intellectual development and favorable surroundings, but over and above physical comforts, the moral and ethical values have also to be noted. They are equal if not more important than the others.
(Extracts from Jaswinder Singh and Another vs Surjit Singh, AIR 2010 (NOC) 425 (P. & H.))- CLAT PG - 2025
- Family Laws
- The Companies Act, 2013 does not deal with insolvency and bankruptcy when the companies are unable to pay their debts or the aspects relating to the revival and rehabilitation of the companies and their winding up if revival and rehabilitation is not possible. In principle, it cannot be doubted that the cases of revival or winding up of the company on the ground of insolvency and inability to pay debts are different from cases where companies are wound up under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013. The two situations are not identical. Under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013, even a running and financially sound company can also be wound up for the reasons in clauses (a) to (e). The reasons and grounds for winding up under Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013 are vastly different from the reasons and grounds for the revival and rehabilitation scheme as envisaged under the IBC. The two enactments deal with two distinct situations and in our opinion, they cannot be equated when we examine whether there is discrimination or violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. For the revival and rehabilitation of the companies, certain sacrifices are required from all quarters, including the workmen. In case of insolvent companies, for the sake of survival and regeneration, everyone, including the secured creditors and the Central and State Government, are required to make sacrifices. The workmen also have a stake and benefit from the revival of the company, and therefore unless it is found that the sacrifices envisaged for the workmen, which certainly form a separate class, are onerous and burdensome so as to be manifestly unjust and arbitrary, we will not set aside the legislation,solely on the ground that some or marginal sacrifice is to be made by the workers. We would also reject the argument that to find out whether there was a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India or whether the right to life under Article 21 Constitution of India was infringed, we must word by word examine the waterfall mechanism envisaged under the Companies Act, 2013, where the company is wound up in terms of grounds (a) to (e) of Section 271 of the Companies Act, 2013; and the rights of the workmen when the insolvent company is sought to be revived, rehabilitated or wound up under the Code. The grounds and situations in the context of the objective and purpose of the two enactments are entirely different.
(Extracted, with edits and revision, from the judgement in Moser Baer Karamchari Union Thr. President Mahesh Chand Sharma v. Union of India and Ors, 2023 SCC Online SC 547)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Company Law
- Ahmadi, J. (as he then was) speaking for himself and Punchhi, J., endorsed the recommendations in the following words-The time is ripe for taking stock of the working of the various Tribunals set up in the country after the insertion of Articles 323-A and 323-B in the Constitution. After the incorporation of these two articles, Acts have been enacted where-under tribunals have been constituted for dispensation of justice. Sufficient time has passed, and experience gained in these last few years for taking stock of the situation with a view to finding out if they have served the purpose and objectives for which they were constituted. Complaints have been heard in regard to the functioning of other tribunals as well and it is time that a body like the Law Commission of India has a comprehensive look-in with a view to suggesting measures for their improved functioning. That body can also suggest changes in the different statutes and evolve a model on the basis whereof tribunals may be constituted or reconstituted with a view to ensuring greater independence. An intensive and extensive study needs to be undertaken by the Law Commission in regard to the Constitution of tribunals under various statutes with a view to ensuring their independence so that the public confidence in such tribunals may increase and the quality of their performance may improve.
Before parting with the case, it is necessary to express our anguish over the ineffectiveness of the alternative mechanism devised for judicial review. The judicial review and remedy are the fundamental rights of the citizens. The dispensation of justice by the tribunal is much to be desired.
(Extracted with Edits from R.K. Jain v. Union of India, 1993 (4) SCC 119)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Constitutional Laws
- The elements of tort of negligence consist in – (a) duty of care; (b) duty is owed to the plaintiff; (c) the duty has been carelessly breached. Negligence does not entail liability unless the exacts a duty in the given circumstances to observe care. Duty is an obligation recognised by law to avoid conduct fraught with unreasonable risk of damage to others. The question whether duty exists in a particular situation involves determination of law. Hence, three ingredients are necessary for the existence of a duty of care: (i) foreseeability of the damage, (ii) proximity of relationship between the parties; and (iii) whether it is “just, fair and reasonable” that the law should impose a duty of care. In Caparo Industries Plc. v. Dickman, 1990 2AC 605, the court held that breach of duty is concerned with the standard of care that ought to have been adopted in the circumstances and whether the defendant’s conduct fell below that standard i.e., whether he was careless.
The court while quoting Rajkot Municipal Corporation v. Manjulben Jayantilal Nakum, 1997 stated that as a tort, negligence consists of legal duty to take care and breach of that duty. Duty determines whether the type of loss suffered by the plaintiff in the particular way in which to occurred can ever be actionable. The division of negligence into duty, breach and consequent damage is convenient for the purpose of exposition but it can be confusing because the issues will often overlap. The process of determining a breach of duty involves three steps: First, it is necessary to ascertain the qualities of the reasonable person, given the qualities attributed to him, would have taken in the circumstances. The factors that are permissible to take into account in this regard are prescribed by law, but the amount of care that the reasonable person would have taken is a question of fact. Thirdly, it must be determined whether the defendant took less care than the reasonable person would have taken.
(Extracts from Managing Director, Kerala Tourism Development Corporation Limited v. Deepti Singh and Ors., 2019 SC)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Law of Torts
- Article 14 of the Constitution stipulates that the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of laws within the territory of India. Article 15(1) states that the State should not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them. Article 15(4) stipulates that nothing in Article 15 shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. Article 16 deals with equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. Clause (1) of Article 16 guarantees equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State. Clause (2) stipulates that no citizen shall be discriminated in or be ineligible for any employment or office under the State on the grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them. Clause (4) of the provision states that nothing in Article 16 shall prevent the State from making any provision for the reservation of appointments or posts in favour of any backward class of citizens, which in the opinion of the State, is not adequately represented in the services under the State. The purpose of the equal opportunity principle in Article 16(1) and the reservation provision in Article 16(4) has emerged as a focal point of the jurisprudence on reservations in this Court. A discussion of the journey of the competing models of equality that the Court has espoused and their evolution over the course of the years is necessary to understand the constitutional vision on equality.
The impugned constitutional amendments by which Article 16 (4-A) and 16 (4-B) have been inserted, flow from Article 16 (4). They do not alter the structure of Article 16 (4). They retain the controlling factors or the compelling reasons which enables the State to provide for reservation keeping in mind the overall efficiency of the state administration under article 335. Sub-categorization within a class is a constitutional requirement to secure substantive equality in the event that there is a distinction between two sections of a class; Sub-classification must not lead to the exclusion of one of the categories in the class. A model that provides sufficient opportunities to all categories of the class must be adopted; and Sub-classification among a class must be on a reasonable basis.
Justice Bela Trivedi opined, in dissent, that presidential list of scheduled castes notified under Article 341 cannot be altered by the States. Any change to this list can only be made by a law enacted by Parliament. Sub-classification, according to her would amount to tampering with the Presidential List and undermine the object Article 341, which aims to eliminate political influence in the SC-ST List. Further, she emphasised the importance of adhering to the rule of plain and literal interpretation. She mentions that any preferential treatment for a sub-class within the presidential list would deprive other classes within the same category of their benefits. In the absence of executive or legislative power, state lack the competence to sub-classify castes and the benefit reserved for all SCs. Allowing states to do so would constitute a colourable exercise of power, which is impermissible under law. Justice Trivedi concluded by affirming that affirmative action by States must remain within constitutional boundaries and held that the law laid down in E.V. Chinnaiah case was correct and should be upheld.
(Extract from The State of Punjab & Ors. v. Davinder Singh & Ors. 2024 SC)- CLAT PG - 2025
- Constitutional Laws
View More Questions