The PuritanBoard - View Single Post

Ivanhoe · #4 (**permalink**) 03-26-2008, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Bombadil

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChristianTrader

Natural law theory offers numerous benefits as a source of ethical and legal norms. Father Joseph Koterski says that universality, objectivity, and intelligibility are three ideals for natural law theory.1 Universality means that it is applicable to all persons at all times, in contrast to positive law which is location and time relative. It also implies, especially when combined with the ideal of intelligibility, that the natural law is knowable by all and that therefore all are responsible for keeping the natural law. A person is exempt from this responsibility only if she or he is not able to understand the natural law. This is not true of positive law, in that a person may be capable of knowing the positive law but not in the right location or time period to have access to that law. Natural law is very appealing because of its universality: such a law would provide universal human rights and values that in turn would provide the foundation for interaction between cultures. It would also provide a standard for determining if a given positive law is just. Without natural law it seems that law would become the rule of the powerful, or the majority, or some similarly arbitrary system. There is much to be said in favor of the idea of a natural law that makes such a study profitable.

http://www.owenanderson.net/reviews/...NaturalLaw.pdf

Thanks for that. (FWIW, the "strengths" have also been the greatest weaknesses. Many ethicists have critiqued NL precisely at the point of its universality and absoluteness.)

At the end he says NL is based on human nature. In one sense this is correct in that God wouldn't have given laws against sodomy had he made us without rectums.

But, in another sense, an NL guy can say that the laws are based on God since God instantiated this type of world, e.g. a world where humans have rectums. Also, God grounds all exiestence, even human existence. And, the imago dei would come into play here as well for the Christain. Furthermore, God's nature grounds some moral laws in the way ours do (cf. the sodomy example), i.e., in worshiping him, honoring him, etc.

Also, we can bring in an *alethic* grounding such that God's nature is the truth-maker for morality.

We can also employ epistemological arguemnts showing the need for revelation. God reveals what is best for man, society, etc. So, a NL position need not be a totally epistemologically autonomous position

I think I would agree. As I understand Aquinas, and I am open to correction, for him natural law participates in God's law (or in the character of God). Hugo Grotius, however, would say that natural law is true even if there weren't a God.