The legal mind

Here's an excerpt from a paper I'm writing. Well it's one of a number that I'm writing at the moment, but I'm hoping to actually complete this one for publication! This is only a first draft but feel free to be as critical as possible...

There exists in the world two streams of intellectuals who have an interest in social issues. Those who see things through the prism of law, and those that do not. For present purposes I will limit myself to those who see things through the prism of law. To the legal mind, everything has a legal formulation. It is true that the law is principally designed to faciliate the fair and equitable arbitration of disputes. However, the legal mind will contend that even in the absence of a dispute all human transactions, be they commercial or civil, personal or criminal, have a legal character. Which is to say, basically, that the law has something to say about every human endeavour. Even when there is a black hole where there is no clear 'law' guiding a certain activity (the treatment of stateless persons is a good example), there is nevertheless the chatacterisation of 'negative law' (or so the legal mind would argue). Negative law is the concept that although a certain activity is not regulated by the law, it is nevertheless recognised by the law in some way in so far as that activity is either not 'illegal' or is 'not lawful'.

Immediately you can see the problem with this way of thinking. It's totally pre-fabricated. Further, in 'the real world', persons do not exactly characterise their actions on the basis of whether they are legal or illegal, or whether the law allows or prohibits certain activities. If you seek illicit substances for example, you might know how much of a certain illicit substance will put you behind bars if you are caught. But your main consideration is trying to obtain this substance without getting caught, because getting caught would mean going to jail and going to jail is not a good thing.