Is it more important for you to follow the letter of the law or to follow the spirit of

the law? In what circumstance would you believe the opposite to be true?

Many people find that legal language is rigid, complex and technical, thus giving a false
impression of not having a place for interpretation. Perhaps, because of the linguistic
precision, we often overlook that law systems are made by humans. We were introduced
to some schools taught in western law (with the USA as a focal point for this course).
Legal positivism states that "the existence and content of law depends on social facts
and not on its merits" (Legal Positivism, 2019), while legal realism stands that "all law
derives from prevailing social interests and public policy" (Legal Realism, n.d.).

The textualism of the legal technical language often creates softens the legitimacy of the
law in the face of the public. As a result, "common sense" is abandoned. Legal
interpretation can be described as a certain type of intellectual operation that is aimed to
clarify or attribute a certain meaning to words in the legal context, thus the words "law"
or "right" becomes clearer. Following the "letter of the law" would assume following
the rules as they are written, leaving no room for interpretation. In contrast, the "spirit of
the law," means that law can be interpreted for practical purposes. Western societies
need to regulate industries to avoid economic crises but also, give place to interpretation
and implementation of laws.

How does the rule of law affect business?

A society without a functional judicial system is more likely to have uncontrollable

corruption and therefore, less competitive in the international marketplace. The rule of
law helps to build competitive, honest and guided industries. It assures legal instances to
protect businesses from injustice, breach of trust and even bankruptcy. It is the basis for
building sound industries to operate in fair and pursuable conditions. 

What would business be like in a land without any rule of law system? 

A concern for ethical business practices is not new. Aristotle fervently criticised usury,
as it was a common practice in Greece (Mayyasi, 2016). Middle Ages theologians
denounced greediness in business relationships. Without regulations, industries would
take advantage of workers, payment would be set only under the employer
considerations, businesses would steal ideas from others due to lack of patents,
economies would collapse. 

References:

Legal Positivism. (2019, December 17). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/legal-positivism/

Legal realism. (n.d.). LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved September 2, 2021,
from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/legal_realism
Mayyasi, A. (2016, December 7). How did usury stop being a sin and become
respectable finance? | Aeon Essays. Aeon. https://aeon.co/essays/how-did-usury-stop-
being-a-sin-and-become-respectable-finance