Political theorist Annabel Brett of Cambridge University explores how the concept of “moral possibility” shapes law, politics, and public obligation. She explains that laws must be realistic for people to follow—what is morally possible varies by individual, culture, time, and circumstance. Drawing on early modern Catholic legal theory, Brett discusses how extreme demands (like enduring war or plague) may justify higher expectations, but only temporarily. She examines how colonial Spanish officials misused this framework to justify forced labor in Peru, wrongly claiming it aligned with indigenous customs. Brett contrasts this with more democratic approaches to law, like Domingo de Soto’s defense of beggars’ rights, which take individuals’ real conditions seriously. Ultimately, she shows how moral possibility is deeply tied to time, virtue, and justice. Commentary is provided by David Dyzenhaus of the University of Toronto. Series: "UC Berkeley Graduate Lectures" [Public Affairs] [Humanities] [Show ID: 40430]