|
An
Overview of Natural Law Theory
by Jonathan Dolhenty, Ph.D.
Natural law theory is one of the most important
theories in the philosophy of Classical Realism. It
is also widely misunderstood by many who have
either not taken the time to study it or have heard
of it and dismissed it as a "medieval" relic. What
I want to do here is merely sketch out a general
presentation of natural law theory, with the hope
that the reader will become interested enough to
pursue further study of it. I will provide a link
to more in-depth resources at the end of this
essay.
Before we get into an overview of the nature of
natural law theory itself, let's take a brief look
at some history.
The concept of natural law has taken several
forms. The idea began with the ancient Greeks'
conception of a universe governed in every
particular by an eternal, immutable law and in
their distinction between what is just by nature
and just by convention. Stoicism provided the most
complete classical formulation of natural law. The
Stoics argued that the universe is governed by
reason, or rational principle; they further argued
that all humans have reason within them and can
therefore know and obey its law. Because human
beings have the faculty of choice (a free will),
they will not necessarily obey the law; if they act
in accordance with reason, however, they will be
"following nature."
Christian philosophers readily adapted Stoic
natural law theory, identifying natural law with
the law of God. For Thomas Aquinas, natural law is
that part of the eternal law of God ("the reason of
divine wisdom") which is knowable by human beings
by means of their powers of reason. Human, or
positive, law is the application of natural law to
particular social circumstances. Like the Stoics,
Aquinas believed that a positive law that violates
natural law is not true law.
With the secularization of society resulting
from the Renaissance and Reformation, natural law
theory found a new basis in human reason. The
17th-century Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius believed
that humans by nature are not only reasonable but
social. Thus the rules that are "natural" to them
-- those dictated by reason alone -- are those
which enable them to live in harmony with one
another. From this argument, by the way, Grotius
developed the first comprehensive theory of
international law.
Natural law theory eventually gave rise to a
concept of "natural rights." John Locke argued that
human beings in the state of nature are free and
equal, yet insecure in their freedom. When they
enter society they surrender only such rights as
are necessary for their security and for the common
good. Each individual retains fundamental
prerogatives drawn from natural law relating to the
integrity of person and property (natural rights).
This natural rights theory provided a philosophical
basis for both the American and French revolutions.
Thomas Jefferson used the natural law theory to
justify his trinity of "inalienable rights" which
were stated in the United States Declaration of
Independence.
During the 19th century natural law theory lost
influence as utilitarianism and Benthamism,
positivism, materialism, and the historical school
of jurisprudence became dominant. In the 20th
century, however, natural law theory has received
new attention, partly in reaction to the rise of
totalitarianism and an increased interest in human
rights throughout the world. With this contemporary
interest in mind, let's now turn to our attention
to the natural law theory as understood by the
tradition of Classical Realism.
What do we mean by "natural law"? In its
simplest definition, natural law is that "unwritten
law" that is more or less the same for everyone
everywhere. To be more exact, natural law is the
concept of a body of moral principles that is
common to all humankind and, as generally posited,
is recognizable by human reason alone. Natural law
is therefore distinguished from -- and provides a
standard for -- positive law, the formal legal
enactments of a particular society.
Since law must always be some dictate of reason,
natural law also will be some dictate of reason. In
fact, it is law discovered by human reason. Our
normal and natural grasp of the natural law is
effected by reason, that is, by the thinking mind,
and in this service reason is sometimes called
"conscience." We, in all our human acts, inevitably
see them in their relation to the natural law, and
we mentally pronounce upon their agreement or
disagreement with the natural law. Such a
pronouncement may be called a "judgment of
conscience." The "norm" of morality is the natural
law as applied by conscience. Lastly, we can say
that the natural law is the disposition of things
as known by our human reason and to which we must
conform ourselves if we are to realize our proper
end or "good" as human beings.
To sum it up, then, we can say that the natural
law:
- is not made by human beings;
- is based on the structure of reality
itself;
- is the same for all human beings and at all
times;
- is an unchanging rule or pattern which is
there for human beings to discover;
- is the naturally knowable moral law;
- is a means by which human beings can
rationally guide themselves to their good.
It is interesting to note that virtually
everyone seems to have some knowledge of natural
law even before such knowledge is codified and
formalized. Even young children make an appeal to
"fair play," demand that things be "fair and
square," and older children and adults often apply
the "golden rule." When doing so, they are
spontaneously invoking the natural law. This is why
many proponents of the natural law theory say it is
the law which is "written upon the hearts of men."
These are examples of what is called "connatural
knowledge," that is, a knowledge which:
- follows on the "lived experience" of the
truth;
- is the living contact of the intellect with
reality itself;
- is not always given expression in
concepts;
- may be obscure to the knower;
- is overlaid with elements from the affective
or feeling side of man's nature.
Now, our reflection on our own conduct gives
rise to the explicit formulation of the precepts of
the natural law. We as human beings put our
"commonsense" notions of natural law under
"critical examination." In other words, our natural
impulses toward "fair play," justice, and so on are
subject to a rigorous investigation and
rationalization. And our understanding of natural
law becomes more precise as we consider and codify
the principles or precepts of natural law. The
primary precept of natural law will be the most
basic principle about human action that can be
formulated.
Those readers familiar with Classical Realism
will recall that there is an absolutely first and
indemonstrable principle in the speculative order
of things. That is, there is an absolutely basic,
self-evident truth of reality upon which we build
our entire metaphysics which serves as the
foundation for our view of the ultimate structure
of reality. This is the Principle of Contradiction,
from which we derive other basic principles such as
Identity and Excluded Middle. Strictly speaking,
the Principle of Contradiction cannot be "proved."
It must be accepted as an absolute "intuitive" or
self-evident truth, the truth of which is shown by
an analysis of the terms of the Principle and the
impossibility of thinking the opposite.
Natural law theory is of the "practical order"
of things and the first principle of the practical
order is a principle that directs human acts in all
their operations, and it will be concerned with the
"good," since we act in terms of what a least seems
good to us. Therefore, the primary principle of the
practical order -- the first precept of natural law
-- is a formulation based upon the notion of the
good and is stated in the following way: The "good"
(according to reason) must be done, and evil (what
is contrary to reason) must be avoided. The
simplest statement of this precept is, of course,
"Do good and avoid evil."
Although we rarely express the precept of "Do
good and avoid evil" explicitly (just as we rarely
state the Principle of Contradiction explicitly in
daily life), nevertheless we always act in terms of
such a precept. This fact points to the fundamental
truth of such a precept, and indicates how it
expresses something "natural" to human beings. A
human being naturally inclines to seek what appears
good to reason, and naturally shrinks from what
appears to be evil. Hence, the justification of
speaking of this basic moral law as "natural"
law.
Upon further reflection, we can distinguish,
within natural law, primary and secondary precepts.
The primary precepts will correspond to the order
of natural inclinations in human beings. The most
fundamental inclination of all, "Do good and avoid
evil," will give rise to other primary precepts
such as the natural inclination to
self-preservation, to live in society, to avoid
harm to others, and to know truths about the
reality we live in and our own human nature. These
primary precepts are unchangeable to the extent
they concern the primary ends of the natural
inclinations inherent in all human beings.
The primary precepts are very general in their
formulation. The secondary precepts, on the other
hand, are more particular or specific and are
concerned with things to which we are not inclined
so immediately. Among these are such precepts as
those regarding the education of children, and the
stability of family life, and the demands of
hospitality. On the negative side, we also have
secondary precepts regarding the neglect of
children, deliberate injury to others, and so
on.
Do we know everything about the natural law?
This is a common question asked and a good one. The
answer is a simple "No." The discovery of the
natural law is a continuously unfolding enterprise.
Just as it took human beings a long time to
separate out and clarify the laws of physical
nature, so too for the laws of moral nature. The
passage of time and additional philosophical
reflection always raises new issues in natural law
theory. For instance, slavery was once accepted as
normal and natural even by many who subscribed to
natural law theory. We now know that slavery
violates the natural law. Society once accepted
judicial torture as being normal and natural. We
now know that judicial slavery violates the natural
law. And, personally, I am convinced that one day
our society will "discover" that capital punishment
violates natural law and we will abolish it.
The obvious conclusion here is that our
knowledge of natural law, particularly regarding
its secondary precepts, is incomplete, and probably
will always be incomplete. We, as civilized and
rational human beings, will always be involved in a
"critical examination" of our actions in the
practical order. Out of this reflection will come
new and refined "truths" regarding ethics and moral
philosophy. In fact, I suspect that we are now in a
time when the most important decisions we make as a
society will be those in ethics and moral
philosophy (think "bioethics" and "weapons of mass
destruction"). This is one reason why I have no
reservations about suggesting that all students in
our institutions of higher education need a good
dose of philosophical studies, especially, of
course, in the tradition of Classical Realism.
I hope you have some general knowledge of
natural law theory as a result of this brief
overview. Moreover, I hope I have interested you to
seek more knowledge about this fascinating
theory.
If you want to learn more, I have suggested some
resources which should help you in your
investigation. See: Dr.
Dolhenty's Recommended Bookshelf For Natural Law
Theory.
Enrich
Your Life With a Philosophy Book...
Enrich
Your Life With a Philosophy
Magazine...
|
Academy
Showcase Specials
|
|
|
|
|
|
|