Your Own Moral Code - Natural Law
Inspired by Nature, Based on Reason. The Journey, Not
the Destination.
The concept of natural law is controversial in the modern
Deist community. We ask only that you take a look and decide for yourself. One of the most most concise and relevant treatments of
natural law is presented in An Overview of Natural Law Theory by
Jonathan Dolhenty, Ph.D., found at
his Radical Academy Archive. Dr. Dolhenty explains that
natural laws are discovered by human reason. Natural laws have certain
characteristics. Natural laws are:
-
not made by human beings;
-
based on the structure of
reality itself;
-
the same for all human beings
and at all times;
-
unchanging rules or patterns
that are there for human beings to discover;
-
the naturally knowable moral
law;
-
means by which human beings can rationally guide
themselves to their good.
These are ideal
characteristics for a Deist moral code. Even as children we have some sense of
right and wrong or a sense of fair play. We reasonably and innately invoke
natural law. This type of knowledge is called “connatural knowledge”, which
is knowledge acquired by “the perfect use of reason”. Connatural knowledge
(according to Dr. Dolhenty and others):
-
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.
Connatural knowledge is not always as neat and perfectly
formed as a
mathematical formula or a scientific theory might be, but the more we study and
see the common sense in natural laws, the more they become “self-evident”.
A criticism of the concept of natural law is that what is self-evident for one person may not be for another.
If the laws of nature are not self-evident to you, then this approach is not
for you. Thomas Aquinas wrote some very interesting and useful works on
natural law, but for Deists, the teachings of Aquinas that include revealed
religion would take them where they would choose not to go. There are things
that are
self-evident only on the basis of some underlying principle. Only if a law of nature is logical and reasonable and able to
exist without a foundation built on divine revelation would it likely be considered
a natural law by a Deist.
Reason and logic are critical to understanding natural law.
Without them, natural law would have no special
meaning for Deists. Dr. Dolhenty further explains that “…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. Self-evident truths cannot always be proven.
Distinct differences would likely be found between a
moral code derived from natural law by a Deist compared to the moral code
from the same natural laws derived by, for instance, a Christian like Thomas
Aquinas. We owe much to Aquinas. He expanded and clarified theories of
natural law and natural rights that were later adopted by such influential
writers as John Locke and Thomas Paine. Aquinas was, however, an influential
member of the Catholic Church, and his conclusions are, ultimately,
Christian.
A Deist might view a natural law such as the law
of survival in the following way. Man is entitled to life. Survival is a natural imperative. From
this law we deduce and derive other laws: we are entitled to defend
ourselves and others when someone else violates this law; we are entitled
to procreate to ensure the survival of the species, etc.
Some religionists, however, might argue that these same
related laws are actually God's
commandments; therefore, not only is life a right, it is an obligation, so
suicide is a mortal sin; procreation is not only a right, it is a duty; therefore, birth control is a sin. It is not too
difficult for an intelligent and reasoning Deist to distinguish between a
rational and reasonable natural law and unreasonable dogma that is claimed
to come from God. The latter seems more likely to have originated from another
man who desires to impose his beliefs on all others. One of the chief
characteristics that separates Deists from revealed religionists is that we
do not submit to the dictates of other men, just because they claim that God
has given them the ultimate truth. We strongly suspect that God did not. We
rather suspect that such men simply want to impose their will on us.
Natural law is a
method, not a code. One does not reason from words, but from facts.
(opens in a new window)
Boiled down to its essentials, the concept of natural law
tells us to do what is right according to reason and to avoid that
which is wrong because it is contrary to reason. If you are building your
own list of natural laws, following this concept is not dogmatic.
Because the world is a dangerous place, and by
nature man possesses a very strong will to live, we must sometimes fight to
protect ourselves. We have had to protect ourselves from beasts since the
dawn of time. Sometimes those beasts were other men. We act according to our
nature. We operate according to natural laws that existed before man became
civilized enough to organize into societies and states and codify formal
laws of behavior. When men behave in a manner that is destructive or harmful
to others, we will defend ourselves. That is natural law. We have a right to
protect ourselves from those who would do us harm. That is a natural right.
Many have long realized that, by our nature
– according to natural law
– we have the rights to life, liberty and property. Self-defense is
natural and lawful. Defending ourselves against those who would deprive us
of our natural rights is in accordance with natural law. The concept of
natural law is often traced to Aristotle, but Sophocles had actually written
in the 4th century B.C. in his play Antigone that, "These
laws are not for now or for yesterday, they are alive forever; and no one
knows when they were shown to us first". Cicero stated in his de Legibus
(On the Laws) in the first century B.C. that the law comes from a higher
and wiser power: “...right reason in agreement with nature, of universal
application, unchanging and everlasting….There will not be a different law
at Rome and at Athens, and different law now and in the future, but one
eternal and unchangeable law for all nations and for all times”. The Stoics
believed in living one’s life according to reason. They considered natural
law part of the natural order of the universe. Thomas Aquinas is credited
with giving us much of what we know about natural law, and much of his
thinking became part of the teachings of the Catholic Church. Aquinas stated
that there were four types of laws: eternal, divine, natural and human.
Eternal law comes from God, and Divine law is what was revealed in the
scriptures. Natural law is what man can recognize by means of reason. Human
law is called positive law.
Thomas Hobbes devised a very detailed
description of 19 natural laws. He felt that the only way to guarantee
natural law was to submit to the laws of a sovereign. John Locke, on the
other hand, turned this idea around and told us that if a sovereign should
create laws that violate natural law, then it is the right of the people to
overthrow that sovereign. In Locke’s philosophy natural law safeguarded
natural rights with the right to property being one of the primary rights
Thomas Paine took the concept of natural rights one step further by stating
that natural rights cannot be granted by charter, because doing so would
imply that a charter could also take them away.
Abraham Lincoln said, “When I do good, I feel
good, and when I do bad, I feel bad. That’s my religion.” Many proponents of
the theory we have been discussing would note that Lincoln was merely
describing natural law, not religion or morality.
We have long known that men can live together
without killing one another. Having this ability is necessary to our
survival. Humans are survivors. It is in our nature to survive. We behave
according to natural law, not all of us, but most of us, because violating
natural law in a primitive society will cost us our lives or cause us to be
attacked by our fellow humans. Violating natural law in modern society
usually also violates positive law, which can
easily result in punishment and imprisonment. In other words, there are
natural deterrents to violating natural law.
How do we know how to live together in
societies? What is a conscience, and what good is it to have one? We can see for ourselves that most
people possess these capabilities and traits. We see it in ourselves, and we
see it in others. We might as well ask how we are able to see, hear or
smell. Scientists know some of the answers to these questions, but not all
the answers. Not knowing exactly how does not deny the existence of these
traits.
The common man with common sense probably
understands and believes in natural law better than some philosophers, and
certainly better than any lawyer. Natural laws are like physical laws. They
are discovered, not invented. They exist whether we know how to explain them
or not. Philosophers and lawyers look for proofs, when, in fact, we simply
have not yet acquired enough knowledge to explain and prove what we already
observe and know. To be sure, proponents of the theories of natural law and
natural rights assert that reason tells us that they are true and they
exist, but proving their existence empirically is difficult.
The theory of natural law led to the Magna
Carta and eventually to the American Revolution. The experiment known as the
United States provided an excellent test of many natural laws, and the test
results support the natural law theories of the founders. Where the law of
the land agrees with natural law, men have the freedom to work and to trade
and to profit from their labor. These activities create prosperity, and all
of society benefits. Where these natural rights are suppressed or denied,
freedom is lost, and prosperity and happiness decrease.
The Moral Code - Natural Law section of this website has
drawn upon many sources. A number of them are listed below. Please point out
any
sources that I have missed that should be attributed:
Natural Law Theory
Cicero - de Legibus
Hugo Grotius
Natural law
Natural rights
Thomas Aquinas on
Natural Law
Rule of Law and
Human Rights
James V. Schall
- Natural Law
