First, from the binding effect on people. Both the rule of law and the rule of virtue aim at promoting social development, but the former focuses on the rule of law.
The latter focuses on treating others, and treating others should be more important than treating the law. Because: First of all, the content of "governing the people" actually contains the requirements of "governing the law", and the ultimate goal of "governing the law" is "governing the people". In the first and last order, it should be "governing the people" as the foundation and "governing the law" as the purpose. Secondly, "governing the people" is the support of "governing the law" and helps to "govern the law" better. As a norm, law can only restrain people's external behavior, but can't intervene in people's inner world; Need people to intervene in people's inner world. Moreover, "optical law is not enough", no matter how good the legal system is, it is still a dead letter if there are no people with the proper quality to implement it. Therefore, simply "governing the law" is not enough to "govern the people." To achieve the ideal goal of the rule of law, we must also put the ultimate goal on.
On "governing the people" Otherwise, even if the perfect law is placed in the supreme position, it is still difficult to achieve the ideal goal we originally envisaged to achieve with the legal system. So the rule of virtue is more important than the rule of law.
Second, from the guiding role to people. The rule of law can only tell people what is wrong and punish them after they make mistakes.
Rule by virtue will not only tell people what is right and wrong, but also tell people why it is wrong.
Why is it right? Let people accept it from the heart and put it into practice. Rule of virtue and rule of law are both
In order to guide people to do what they should do and do good things. At this point, the rule of virtue is much better than the rule of law. Therefore, the rule of virtue is more important than the rule of law.
Third, from the scope of action. The scope of the rule of virtue is much wider than the rule of law, so the coverage of the rule of virtue is
Larger in scale, more in audience and more in content. Many laws do not involve or cannot involve.
Local morality will also exist. For example, give your seat to the old, the weak, the sick and the disabled on the bus, or give your seat in places where contact with the outside world is difficult. People there may not know what the law stipulates, but they must know that morality requires him.
Son, what? Therefore, the rule of virtue can promote social development more than the rule of law.
We do not deny the role played by the rule of law in social development, but we also admit that the rule of law has done something that cannot be done by morality alone because of its distinctive and rigid characteristics. However, based on the national conditions and long-term development of contemporary China, we insist that the rule of virtue is more important than the rule of law in contemporary China.