Natural law removed from category
← Older revision
Revision as of 01:24, 20 July 2016
Line 1:
Line 1:
−
'''
[[
w
:
Natural
law
|
Natural
law
]]'''
is a
rule
or
body
of
rules
of
conduct
inherent
in
human
nature
and
essential
to or
binding
upon
human
society
.
+
[[
File
:
Murray
Rothbard.jpg
|
thumb|The natural
law is
, in essence,
a
profoundly
"[[radical]]"
[[ethic]], for it holds the existing status quo, which might grossly violate natural law, up to the unsparing and unyielding light
of
[[reason]]. … At this point, we need only stress that the very [[existence]]
of
a
natural
law
discoverable
by [[reason]] is a potentially powerful threat to the status quo
and
a standing reproach
to
the reign of [[blindly]] [[traditional]] [[custom]]
or
the
[[arbitrary]]
[[Will
(philosophy)|will]] of the [[State]] apparatus
.
<br><center>~ [[Murray N. Rothbard]]</center>]]
+
[[File:LysanderSpooner.jpg|thumb|But if [[justice]] be a [[natural]] [[principle]], then it is necessarily an immutable one; and can no more be changed…than can the [[law]] of [[gravitation]], the laws of [[light]], the principles of [[mathematics]], or any other natural law or principle whatever; and all attempts or assumptions, on the part of any [[person|man]] or body of men—whether calling themselves [[governments]], or by any other name—to set up their own commands, [[will (philosophy)|wills]], [[pleasure]], or [[discretion]], in the place of justice, as a rule of conduct for any [[human being]], are as much an [[absurdity]], an usurpation, and a [[tyranny]], as would be their attempts to set up their own commands, wills, pleasure, or discretion in the place of any and all the [[physical]], [[mental]], and [[moral]] laws of the [[universe]].<br><center>~ [[Lysander Spooner]]</center>]]
+
'''[[w:Natural law|Natural law]]''' is a rule or body of rules of conduct inherent in human nature, discoverable by reason, and essential to or binding upon human society.
−
{{theme-stub}}
+
==Quotes==
−
==
Sourced
==
+
*It
is
true that when medieval [[writers]] spoke of natural law as being discoverable by [[reason]], they meant that the best [[human]] reasoning could [[discover]] it, and not, of course, that the results to which any and every individual's reasoning led him was natural law.
−
*
It is true that when medieval writers spoke of natural law as being discoverable by reason
,
they
meant that the best human reasoning could discover it, and not,
of
course
,
that the results to which any and every individual's reasoning led
him
was
natural
law
.
+
*
*J. L.
Brierly
,
''The
Law
of
Nations''
,
pp.
20-21
(5th
ed.
1955)
.
−
** J.L. Brierly, ''The Law of Nations'', pp. 20-21 (5th ed. 1955)
+
−
*
When
most
people
speak
of
natural
law
, what they have in mind
is
the
contention
that
morality
can
be
derived
from
human
nature.
If
human
beings
are
rational animals of such
-
and-such
a sort, then the moral virtues are...(filling in the blanks is the
difficult
part)
.
+
*
Whether
something
falls
within the domain
of
‘‘[[
law
]]’’
is
,
for
a
natural
lawyer,
at
least
partially
or
nominally
determined
by
reference
to
an
extra
-
legal
standard
or
norm
.
−
**{{citation|author=[[w:David Gordon (philosopher)|David Gordon]]|title=Review of In Defense of Natural Law by Robert George|url=http://mises.org/misesreview_detail.aspx?control=129|publisher=Ludwig von Mises Institute}}
−
*The very existence of a natural law discoverable by reason is a potentially powerful threat to the status quo and a standing reproach to the reign of blindly traditional custom or the arbitrary will of the State apparatus.
−
**{{cite book|title=The Ethics of Liberty|url=http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics.pdf|chapter=Natural Law Versus Positive Law|pages=17|author=[[Murray Rothbard]]}}
−
*Whether something falls within the domain of ‘‘law’’ is, for a natural lawyer, at least partially or nominally determined by reference to an extra-legal standard or norm.
**{{cite journal|title=Judicial Review without a Constitution|author=Douglas E. Edlin|journal=Polity|volume=38|number=3|date=Jul., 2006|pages=345-368|publisher=Palgrave Macmillan Journals|url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/3877071}}
**{{cite journal|title=Judicial Review without a Constitution|author=Douglas E. Edlin|journal=Polity|volume=38|number=3|date=Jul., 2006|pages=345-368|publisher=Palgrave Macmillan Journals|url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/3877071}}
+
+
*When most people speak of natural law, what they have in [[mind]] is the contention that [[morality]] can be derived from human [[nature]]. If [[human beings]] are [[rational]] [[animals]] of such-and-such a sort, then the moral [[virtues]] are…(filling in the blanks is the [[difficult]] part).
+
**{{citation|author=[[w:David Gordon (philosopher)|David Gordon]]|title=Review of In Defense of Natural Law by Robert George|url=http://mises.org/misesreview_detail.aspx?control=129|publisher=Ludwig von Mises Institute}}.
+
+
*It offends [[reason]] to believe that a well-established natural law can admit of [[exceptions]]. A natural law must hold everywhere and always, or be invalid. I cannot believe, for example, that the universal law of [[gravitation]], which governs the physical world, is ever suspended in any instance or at any point of the [[universe]]. Now I consider [[economic]] [[laws]] comparable to natural laws, and I have just as much faith in the principle of the [[division of labor]] as I have in the universal law of gravitation. I believe that while these principles can be ''disturbed'', they admit of no exceptions.
+
**[[Gustave de Molinari]], [[s:The Production of Security/2|§II]] of ''[[s:The Production of Security|The Production of Security]]'', tr. J. Huston McCulloch (Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2009; orig. 1849), [[s:Page:The Production of Security.pdf/26|p. 25]].
+
+
*'''The natural law is, in essence, a profoundly "[[radical]]" [[ethic]], for it holds the existing [[status quo]], which might grossly violate natural law, up to the unsparing and unyielding light of [[reason]].''' In the realm of [[politics]] or [[State]] [[action]], the natural law presents [[people|man]] with a set of [[norms]] which may well be radically critical of existing positive [[law]] imposed by the State. At this point, we need only stress that the very [[existence]] of a natural law [[discoverable]] by [[reason]] is a potentially powerful threat to the status quo and a standing reproach to the reign of [[blindly]] [[traditional]] [[custom]] or the [[arbitrary]] [[Will (philosophy)|will]] of the [[State]] apparatus.
+
**[[Murray N. Rothbard]], "Natural Law versus Positive Law," ch. 3 in "Introduction: Natural Law," Pt. I of ''[[The Ethics of Liberty]]'' (New York: New York University Press, 1998; orig. 1982), p. 17.
+
+
*No [[objection]] can be made to these [[voluntary]] [[associations]] upon the ground that they would lack that [[knowledge]] of [[justice]], as a [[science]], which would be necessary to enable them to maintain justice, and themselves avoid doing [[injustice]]. [[Honesty]], justice, natural law, is usually a very plain and simple matter, easily [[understood]] by common [[minds]]. Those who desire to know what it is, in any particular case, seldom have to go far to find it.
+
**[[Lysander Spooner]], §IV of "[[Lysander Spooner#Chapter I. The Science of Justice.|The Science of Justice]]," Chap. I of ''[[Natural Law; or The Science of Justice]]'' (1882), p. 8.
+
+
*[[Children]] [[learn]] the fundamental [[principles]] of natural law at a very early age. Thus they very early [[understand]] that one child must not, without [[just]] cause, strike or otherwise [[hurt]], another; that one child must not assume any arbitrary [[control]] or [[domination]] over another; that one child must not, either by [[force]], [[deceit]], or [[stealth]], obtain possession of anything that [[property|belongs]] to another; that if one child commits any of these wrongs against another, it is not only the [[right]] of the injured child to resist, and, if need be, [[punish]] the wrongdoer, and compel him to make [[reparation]], but that it is also the right, and the [[moral]] [[duty]], of all other children, and all other [[persons]], to assist the [[injured]] party in [[defending]] his rights, and redressing his wrongs. These are fundamental principles of natural law, which govern the most important transactions of man with man. Yet children learn them earlier than they learn that three and three are six, or five and five ten. Their childish plays, even, could not be carried on without a constant regard to them; and it is equally [[impossible]] for persons of any age to [[live]] together in [[peace]] on any other conditions.<p>It would be no extravagance to say that, in most cases, if not in all, mankind at large, young and old, learn this natural law long before they have learned the [[meanings]] of the [[words]] by which we describe it. In [[truth]], it would be impossible to make them understand the real meanings of the words, if they did not understand the [[nature]] of the thing itself. To make them understand the meanings of the words [[justice]] and [[injustice]] before knowing the nature of the things themselves, would be as impossible as it would be to make them understand the meanings of the words [[heat]] and [[cold]], [[wet]] and [[dry]], [[light]] and [[darkness]], [[white]] and [[black]], [[one]] and [[two]], before knowing the nature of the things themselves. Men necessarily must know [[sentiments]] and [[ideas]], no less than material things, before they can know the meanings of the words by which we describe them.
+
**[[Lysander Spooner]], §IV of "[[Lysander Spooner#Chapter I. The Science of Justice.|The Science of Justice]]," Chap. I of ''[[Natural Law; or The Science of Justice]]'' (1882), pp. 9–10.
+
+
*'''But if [[justice]] be a [[natural]] [[principle]], then it is necessarily an immutable one; and can no more be changed'''—by any [[power]] inferior to [[God|that which established it]]—'''than can the [[law]] of [[gravitation]], the laws of [[light]], the principles of [[mathematics]], or any other natural law or principle whatever; and all attempts or assumptions, on the part of any [[person|man]] or body of men—whether calling themselves [[governments]], or by any other name—to set up their own [[commands]], [[will (philosophy)|wills]], [[pleasure]], or [[discretion]], in the place of justice, as a rule of conduct for any [[human being]], are as much an [[absurdity]], an [[usurpation]], and a [[tyranny]], as would be their attempts to set up their own commands, wills, pleasure, or discretion in the place of any and all the [[physical]], [[mental]], and [[moral]] laws of the [[universe]].'''
+
**[[Lysander Spooner]], §I of "[[Lysander Spooner#Chapter II. The Science of Justice (Continued)|The Science of Justice (Continued)]]," Chap. II of ''[[Natural Law; or The Science of Justice]]'' (1882), pp. 11–12.
+
+
*If there be such a [[principle]] as [[justice]], or natural law, it is the principle, or [[law]], that tells us what [[rights]] were given to every [[human being]] at his [[birth]]; what rights are, therefore, inherent in him as a human being, necessarily remain with him during [[life]]; and, however capable of being trampled upon, are incapable of being blotted out, extinguished, annihilated, or separated or eliminated from his [[nature]] as a human being, or deprived of their inherent [[authority]] or [[obligation]].<p>On the other hand, if there be no such principle as justice, or natural law, then every human being came into the world utterly destitute of rights; and coming into the world destitute of rights, he must necessarily [[forever]] remain so. For if no one brings any rights with him into the world, clearly no one can ever have any rights of his own, or give any to another. And the [[consequence]] would be that mankind could never have any rights; and for them to talk of any such things as their rights, would be to talk of things that never had, never will have, and never can have any [[existence]].
+
**[[Lysander Spooner]], §IV of "[[Lysander Spooner#Chapter II. The Science of Justice (Continued)|The Science of Justice (Continued)]]," Chap. II of ''[[Natural Law; or The Science of Justice]]'' (1882), pp. 12–13.
==See also==
==See also==