A Paper About Justice, Dignity, Torture, Headscarves: Can Durkheim’s Socioligy Clarify Legal Values?/ Roger Cotterrell

Task Could you write a one to cardinal page compendium of what Cotterrell says can be learned from a sociological approach in thinking what to do ab discover the famous problem of whether Islamic women should be allowed to deck in all - screen veil. Restrictions on the wear of the Islamic nonch scarf and body covering gown A legal-moral issue In his article Justice, Dignity, Torture, Headscarves Can Durkheims Socioligy Clarify Legal Values?Roger Cotterrell attempts to find out what Emile Durkheim would say regarding two issues that stand out in present years the acceptability of torture in defense of national security and restrictions on the wearing of the Islamic headscarf. Cotterrell takes Derkheims approach regarding the sociology of moral philosophy in sight to date moral and legal evaluation of contemporary legal studies Cotterrell examines Durkheims clean individuality musical theme (the cult of the individual or cult of the human person) concerning those two issues.I would focus on the second issue and would try to sum Cotterrells arguments on what the Durkheimian approach would say regarding the famous problem of whether Islamic women should be allowed to dress in all-covering veil. Firstly, I will explain what Moral individualism is and Durkheims justifications for it. Then, I will display Cotterrells justifications to why this approach is relevant nowadays. Thirdly, I will examine the dilemma in hand in a sociological way and try and understand what Cotterrell and Durkheim would say on the matter. Moral Individualism According to Cotterrell, the essential idea that stands on the basis of the Moral Individualism ruler is universal respect for the pit human dignity and autonomy of either member of society, whatever differences there may be in the outlook, position, flavor conditions or roles of societys members. Durkheim feels strongly about ensuring that societies will integrate, or rather will be fitting to integrate, and will be able to be cohesive. I. e. if individuals in a certain society grant equal and ultimate respect to other individuals and their autonomy that society will be able to better integrate and be cohesive and will in the end work better as a group/society. Current relevance Cotterrell argues that the Moral individualism idea provides an alternative to familiar current ideas about the airfield of human dignity. Durkheims ideas on solidarity and the body suggests that prohibiting certain forms of this, scarcely not others, contravenes determine of human dignity.For example, if society does not respect the choice of Muslim women to dress in a certain way society, de facto, does not respect these womens right for human dignity. Durkheim does not claim that following an investigation agree to the Moral Individualism principle will result in a globular time-less conclusion, but a specific conclusion of practices needed in revise to ensure stable, cohesive society. Another justi fication Cotterrell finds is in the demand practice of law makes from citizens nowadays.Today, more than ever law should be examined as an expression of morality as appose to an expression of power, not philosophically but in a way of finding the compatible terms and conditions of co-existence of individuals and groups in a certain time and place. Regulation of female Islamic dress Cotterrell depicts what Durkheim sees as the problematic character of sexuality viewed in the light of the socio-logical urgency of Moral Individualism sexual relations, in Durkheims view, causes a sacrifice of the dignity and autonomy of both sexes in this action, and women in differentiateicular.This sacrifice leads to an exception in a society where the values of dignity and autonomy are fundamental and necessary. This exception, which is part of islands of exceptions that can be found in Durkheims idea, leads to an ambiguity in practicing rights protect dignity and autonomy especially for women. F ollowing this line of thought, Cotterrel argues that the practice of Muslim women wearing the headscarves or the body-covering gown is fitting to Durkheims Moral Individualism principle.This argues that in auberge to protect this idea, which is fundamental, we conceal our body as well as our sexual life from prying eyes. This concealment is possibly in order to desexualize public social space, to terminate that island of exception. Meaning, the women that are wearing these covering garments actually makes it easier to help the society be more cohesive and to be more of the same. In my opinion, this method of achieving Moral Individualism is not appropriate, because it takes away from the individual the ability to reveal her face, her facial expressions and it is probably very uncomfortable at certain times.I should add that Moral Individualism is supposed to celebrate revolution and individualism, but it does not in this example of the headscarf issue. Cotterrell argues the same notion but in a cultural integration way. He claims that these women are taken away from the public space because of the cultural differences these garments impose on non-Muslim society. To summarize, Durkheim offers a different approach to the discussion about Islamic headscarves and even bypasses lots pre-existing debate on the matter as Cotterrell argues. Moral Individualism justifies the wearing of all-covering garments since it helps avoiding sexual connotations when integrating within a multi-cultural society. However, this approach also suggests that womens choices of vestments should be connected to Moral Individualism. 1 . Note that these womens religion is not the issue here, they could lay down believed in a Judaism or Buddhism, and the principle would have remained the same.