Natural law
Student’s name
Institution affiliation
Do you believe in natural law and natural justice? If so, which of the two positions (transcendental or evolutionary) most convinces you? If you do not believe in either position, from where do you think humans gained their sense of justice.
The answer is yes. Natural law has answered many questions about human nature. Natural law, however, does not give complete answers to the questions that human beings ponder. Critics of the theories always try to conflict it with the legal positivist theories which is inappropriate. Natural law is a system that is based on the values and beliefs that are intrinsic to human nature. Natural law activists believe that all individuals have inherent rights conferred to them by a mighty being. The mighty being is omnipresent and serves to guide individuals to do good.
The Greek philosophers such as Aristotle contributed immensely to the concept of natural law and influenced future scholars. Scholars like Thomas Aquinas used Aristotle’s material to study, analyze, and reformulate the concepts of natural law. Natural law found precedence in Christianity and Islamic religion that was used as the focal point of analysis (Rommen, 2012). The main theories of natural law and natural justice were formulated during the age of enlightenment. It is irrefutable that natural law has played critical roles in the development of international laws. For example, Thomas Jefferson relied on the staunch concepts of equality for all when they were developing the American constitution. Natural laws laid the foundation for the development of the universal bill of rights by the United Nations and the establishment of the English common law.
Stoics conceived of an entirely egalitarian law of nature in agreement with the logos intrinsic to human beings. The writings of St Paul concluded that the laws were written in the hearts of the Gentiles. Stoics was the first to elucidate the principles of natural law, however, it is Aristotle who claims the title of the father of natural law (Boyle, 2017). Stoics postulated that the world consists of a rational universal order known as the eternal or divine law and that rational beings conform to this order. This is what is known as natural law. Furthermore, natural law facilitates man to abide with this universal eternal law. Consequently, human beings discover natural law with time, that is, they do not create it.
The transcendental perspective underlines the importance and supremacy of spirituality over the materialistic world. It asserts the necessity of the transcendental realm. The transcendentalists firmly believe in the existence of everlasting and natural laws that surpass the legal interests of only one specific society at a given point in time. The law demands respect by all. Many of the early proponents of natural law believed in God. This elaborates on the high number of Christian scholars such as Thomas Aquinas who studied the concepts of natural law. However, it is not necessary to believe in the existence of a natural being to be a proponent of this concept. Secular supporters of natural law believe that its principles are associated and derived from human nature (Boyle, 2017). Transcendentalists warn people from criticizing people of a given society for their beliefs. According to them, all cultures are equal and no culture should attempt to assert its superiority over another. People should desist from passing moral judgments on persons of different cultures. The perspectives conform to Plato’s theory of forms that shaped the western legal field. Ironically, it consists of mostly non-formal sets of statutes and procedures and is considered to be laws within a law. The international legal community uses the term Jus cogens for this perspective of natural law (Rommens, 2012).
The evolutionary perspective is based on the principles of evolutionary biology. The theory draws evidence from the research by Charles Darwin who gained international recognition for his research into human fossils. Evolutionists pursue empirical backing from studies on human behavior and other species. The theory postulates that human beings are bound to make certain choices because such choices enabled the survival of Homo sapiens ancestors. It deviates from the perspective that behavior is guided by the omnipresent being. The evolutionists regard any behavior that is established in all cultures and any closely related species as natural in conformity to Darwin’s theory that human beings are distant relatives of apes. Moral sensibility is worldwide. The evolutionists agree that moral sensibility varies from culture to culture and also changes with time (d’Entreves, 2017). According to the change is permanent and so is a people’s culture that evolves. The yearning to punish has an in-built physiological basis. Essentially, people recognize the injustice they have felt before and, therefore, punish culprits because of this outrage. Hence, punishments provide emotional relief. Whereas transcendentalism postulates for an immutable, absolute moral code, evolutionists embrace generality but accept the likelihood of exceptions.
For this part, the evolutional perspective is superior and I agree with it because it provides a better understanding of natural law. There are several shortcomings to the natural law perspective. First, it is doubtful to infer moral principles forbidding rape and homosexuality solely from biological knowledge alone or from the knowledge of the intrinsic character of Homo sapiens. It is also uncertain that the intrinsic nature of human beings formed their laws of behavior similar to the laws of behavior of other animals. Despite these shortcomings, the legal systems and society should embrace the role of natural law.
References
Boyle, J. (2017). Natural law and the ethics of traditions. In Thomas Aquinas (pp. 157-184). Routledge.
d’Entreves, A. P. (2017). Natural law: An introduction to legal philosophy. Routledge.
Rommen, H. A. (2012). The natural law. Liberty Fund.
