The Law Fails with Human interaction

In any civilized society certain basic agreements must be in place, agreements that everyone must agree to abide by. These agreements, that we have labeled  “Laws”  provide the basis upon which human interaction should take place.

These laws have been expanded from the basic, the 10 Commandments from the Bible, to the complicated set we now have in place. Like what Henry Ford did to manufacturing, present law makers have tried to do, that is by producing a single law to deal with the infinite possibilities of a single human interaction.

In manufacturing mass production has resulted in the lowering of costs, making many items available to the wider populace. This benefit though, has a negative repercussions, such as the loss of individuality to the consumer, since now every household has exactly the same Campbell's chicken noodle soup. But individuality is  important to us, and so our natural inclination for personalization created a new business oppertunity for products that allow us to reintroduce our uniqueness to mass-produced items. I can buy a car identical to the one you can buy, but I can personalize, i.e. make it my own, with add-on's such as seat covers, wheels, tires etc.

Not so with the law. The law deals with specifics that are written by lawmakers and no amount of aftermarket products can change the specific law that pertains to your case. Unlike manufactured products were perimeters are based on constants, example:- your dish spoon is made of high density plastic and is yellow, no matter if you produce 100 or 1 million, they will always be plastic and yellow. Not so with humans, our complicated nature practically demands that every interaction, stemming from a constant [like bumping into each other on a busy street] is uniquely different and to have one written law that defines only a single possible reaction from this is just not realistic.

In my opinion trying to define reactions between humans is impossible, lawmakers are approaching our problems from the wrong direction. Rather than trying to define each individual and unique possibility stemming from a single human interaction they should instead seek out and train the best interpreters of a universal right and wrong and train them as judges bound only by the basic laws and their own conscience.