Social Recognition of the Law

I think that Raz’s claim that legal authority is based upon the fact that it is recognized as a mediator among social disputes is inherently true. People know that the law can resolve their legal disputes and turn to it in when they need assistance in such matters rather than taking the problem into their own hands. While in the past social disputes might have been settled with a duel or paying one another a certain some of gold or other valuables, people now leave this responsibility up to the legal authority with a genuine belief that their dispute will be resolved in the most civilized and effective matter, while being strict yet fair. I think the concerns raised by the Milgram experiment are legitimate objections to Raz’s view on conventional authority because if people in the society do not recognize legal officials as having the power of authority over their behavior then they will not turn to these same officials to see their assistance in mediating a social dispute. We should accept the law’s factual capacity to resolve the majority of disputes as reason enough to submit to its authority because by doing so we allow a third party to mediate the disagreement and hear out both sides and judge the case fairly. In most social disputes, a third party is necessary to provide a fair outcome and to ensure that justice is truly carried out. Also, I think that just because a legal authority receives social recognition, it does not mean that individuals cannot question its laws.