- #1
mech-eng
- 828
- 13
Abul-Walid Mohammed ibn-Ahmad Ibn-Mohammed ibn-Roshd this historical character is admitted as a lawyer but I do not think that there was job as lawyer in his time.
Evo said:Did you have a question?
mech-eng said:Yes, it seems to me strange. I think there could not be any lawyer that time. Why is he defined as a lawyer?
Greg Bernhardt said:This is very esoteric. Can you link us to information on this person?
Evo said:First, I've never heard of him. Apparently he's more known in Muslim history. I did find him in wikipedia. There is a tiny reference to him to do with Islamic law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Averroes#Jurisprudence_and_law
I guess if someone studied philosophy they would have. It seems Ibn Rushd or Averroës would be more familiar.mech-eng said:I have alway heard that that philosopher is well know by people of west.
Evo said:First, I've never heard of him. Apparently he's more known in Muslim history. I did find him in wikipedia. There is a tiny reference to him to do with Islamic (specifically religious Maliki) law. That gets into religion, which we don't get into here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Averroes#Jurisprudence_and_law
It is more likely that ibn Rushd was a jurist or ulema, rather than a lawyer.mech-eng said:Abul-Walid Mohammed ibn-Ahmad Ibn-Mohammed ibn-Roshd this historical character is admitted as a lawyer but I do not think that there was job as lawyer in his time.
I suspect dead lawyer jokes started appearing soon after Hammurabi's code was written down.SteamKing said:As to whether there were 'attorneys' in his time, there have been law codes since the time of the Akkadian king Hammurabi (died 1750 B.C.), and since there were legal codes, surely there were people skilled at arguing and interpreting what these codes said.
mech-eng said:I only understand from a lawyer that he is someone who goes to court and defend someone need defence.
SteamKing said:Hopefully, he, the lawyer, is also skilled and knowledgeable in the law against which his client needs a defense.
mech-eng said:I only understand from a lawyer that he is someone who goes to court and defend someone need defence.
WWGD said:There is also the prosecuting side, the side that brings the suit. I don't know how it works outside of the US, but there are plaintiffs and defendants.
SW VandeCarr said:Well, prosecutors and plaintiff lawyers have their clients too, and at least in the US, they are not adverse to taking a favorable interpretation of the law and the facts to win their cases. The adversarial system is usually about winning and not so much about truth and justice.
WWGD said:At least in theory the adversarial system is the best one to bring-about the truth, given that, as you say, neither party is interested in the truth.
SW VandeCarr said:Right now in the US, a single judge presides, but only to keep order. The jury takes no active part, although I did see one recent trial (Arizona vs Jodi Arias) where the jury could submit written questions to the defendant. In criminal trials without a jury, the judge gives the verdict and penalty, but otherwise usually only acts to keep order.
SteamKing said:I think you are missing the fact that a lot of the trial decisions made by the judge are done so outside of the courtroom. The judge in a trial isn't just a majordomo, who is there to keep the two lawyers from slugging one another. There are usually issues dealing with admissibility of evidence or other matters of trial procedure which the judge must decide and rule on outside the presence of the jury. By the time a case has reached the courtroom stage, a lot of work has already been done preparing for the trial, work in which the judge must participate. Once the arguments have concluded, the judge must also instruct the jury in matters of the law, so that the jury can take the facts of the case as presented, apply the law, and then decide on a verdict.
The role of law during Abul-Walid ibn-Roshd's time was multifaceted. On one hand, the legal system served as a means of maintaining social order and resolving disputes. On the other hand, law was also used as a tool for political control and upholding the power of the ruling class.
Abul-Walid ibn-Roshd, also known as Averroes, was a prominent Islamic philosopher and jurist who made significant contributions to the development of law during his time. He wrote numerous commentaries on legal texts and used his philosophical insights to interpret and analyze legal principles.
The main sources of law during Abul-Walid ibn-Roshd's time were the Quran, the Sunnah (practices and teachings of Prophet Muhammad), consensus of scholars, and analogical reasoning. These sources were used to derive legal rulings and establish the principles of Islamic jurisprudence.
Abul-Walid ibn-Roshd believed in the compatibility of reason and religion, and he argued that reason could be used to interpret and understand religious texts. This influenced his understanding of law, as he emphasized the importance of rational thinking and critical analysis in legal reasoning and decision-making.
Abul-Walid ibn-Roshd's works had a significant impact on the development of law in the Islamic world. His commentaries on legal texts and his integration of philosophy into legal principles greatly influenced the field of Islamic jurisprudence. His ideas were also later adopted and expanded upon by other scholars, further shaping the development of law in the Islamic world.