Fuller's perception of law as a moral enterprise requires that a system adhere to the eight desired things, which he calls "the internal morality of law." Despite being “a procedural version of natural law”, indifferent to the substantive morality of laws, Fuller argues that for an external moral law to exist, the fulfillment of internal morality, expressed by the principles of procedural justice, is necessary, since internal and external moralities of Law In an attempt to demonstrate that desiderata are intrinsically moral and that "evil laws can destroy a legal system," Fuller appeals to the moral values ​​embedded in law itself. By declaring the law to be a "purposeful enterprise" by subjecting humanity to the control of rules, law produces a social order that implies respect for human autonomy and a commitment to considering man as a "responsible agent" able to respect the rules; A legislator who embraces this vision will refrain from insulting human dignity by departing from these principles. Even if we only want law as order, rather than law as good order, there is a “morality of order” that must be respected, otherwise legal order would not be possible. By portraying the law as a mutual matter involving a government command of citizens and the government's commitment to judging citizens according to these rules, loyalty to precepts ensures that the duties imposed are what citizens will be held accountable to. By increasing the legitimacy of the law in the eyes of the population, the principles ensure that the law can be respected, reducing the possibility of punishment for a violation of which the individual was unaware. Providing “reliable guidance for self-directed action” and a legal system of fair opportunity, the full… center of the charter… dignity of persons, as evidence of legal commands involving respect for the individual's capacity to make decisions independently. However, to say that commands constitute moral respect for one's subjects is to suggest that a thief's instruction to his victim to decide whether to obey or be shot constitutes a recognition of his autonomy. “Rules can be general while stifling the freedom of the people subject to them,” and thus Fuller's notion of law as a moral enterprise, pursuing moral ends is questionable. Faced with positivist criticism, the supposition that "evil laws can destroy a right system", it is difficult to pledge allegiance. Fuller's failure to defend his position convincingly makes it worthy of condemnation as an "untenable doctrine", erroneous in its assertion that systems of "moral turpitude" have no legal system..