NATURAL LAW

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.
In Classical Realism, 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.
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.