Preview

Natural Law vs. Positive Law

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
521 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Natural Law vs. Positive Law
Natural Law VS. Positive Law

Laws are rules established by a governing authority to organize and maintain orderly existence. It can generally be divided into two principles: Natural law, which is based on the divine, and Positive law which states that laws are what the lawmakers command. Throughout history many philosophers have come to be linked to either branch of law. Philosophers such as Aristotle advocated Natural law, while others, such as Thomas Hobbes, supported Positive law. Each provided strong notions that helped form modern day law.

Aristotle believed that because humans are capable of a higher level of thinking that they could therefore judge for themselves. This is also known as rationalism. He was committed to his belief that because of our higher level of thinking, humans are capable of obtaining true happiness. He believed that the sole purpose for law was to make people happy. Any law that served towards the betterment of the people was therefore just, and any law that made people unhappy was unjust and ought to be disobeyed and debated over in order to satisfy all. He felt that the reason behind unjust laws was their grounds were flawed and were unable to serve justice.

Aristotle 's perception of justice was associated with laws that made the majority happy; only if the people were happy could justice ever be served. This view contrasts that of Thomas Hobbes whose standpoint reflected Positive law. In conflicting with Aristotle 's belief that humans can govern themselves due do rationalization, Hobbes believed that humans are violent and war like and that they have a right to all things. He was dedicated in his theory that Natural law grants too much freedom to humans. Hobbes argued that a governing body was necessary to control society by enforcing laws and deciding through law what was morally right and wrong. He felt that people could reach happiness and justice, but only with the presence of law to act as a



Cited: # ^ Shellens, "Aristotle on Natural Law," 75–81 # ^ "Natural Law," International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. # ^ "Natural Law," International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. # ^ Burns, "Aquinas 's Two Doctrines of Natural Law

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Hobbes added to the ideas of democracy by creating the idea that all men are born bad with an urge for war. He stated that in order to have a stable society, government would be required to strictly watch and govern each citizen. He writes that man should give down their power to a much bigger government in order to maintain a single power that can help control the masses. This bigger…

    • 507 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hammurabi Laws

    • 673 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Laws are the rules that every human being is supposed to abide by. Laws are set in place to ensure everyone’s safety and well being, as well as to help run a society. Good laws protect all kinds of people regardless of their gender, race, culture, age, how much money they have or what “class” they belong to. Laws can be unfair and prejudicial to certain people.…

    • 673 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    According to Hobbes, government is needed so that society will not collapse into violence due to humanity’s selfish desires and self-interest. Hobbes believes that humanity’s natural state is motivated by self-interest and will do everything they can to succeed in their endeavors. People will do whatever it takes to fulfill what their idea of ‘good ’is. When everyone acts this way it quickly devolves into chaos, war, and violence.…

    • 266 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes was a philosopher who saw humans as a purely physical being. He believed that all human actions can be explained through the motions in our bodies. According to Hobbes all feelings and emotions are a result of phantasms, our perception of the objects around us. This perception is a motion within our bodies and each person perceives these phantasms differently causing love, hate, desires, and what we think is good and bad. Every feeling that comes from ones perspective has a physical feeling, such as desires can cause certain pains and it is only human nature that one does whatever is needed in order to relieve those pains. Hobbes therefore sees humans as being able, by their state of nature, to take or do whatever necessary for themselves even if it shows no regard for the other people their actions may harm. This inevitably would end up in a fight for survival or “the war of all against all”. In order to prevent such a war from happening Hobbes thought it necessary that the individuals must promise each other to give up their right to govern themselves to the sovereign for the mutual benefit of the people. This sovereign then has absolute power to rule with no questions asked and not to only act on behalf of the citizens but to completely embody their will. In summation, Hobbes believed that society could only exist under power of the sovereign and that life in the state of nature is violent, short and brutish, as all men act on self-interest.…

    • 1014 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The theory of natural law originates from Aristotle’s idea of goodness as fitness for purpose and stoic’s concept of a universal law of reason which is in agreement with nature. What we now call human nature. This point is then furthered by Aquinas who agrees with the argument but furthers it by linking it with his Christian belief by saying following this law is equivalent to following the command of God as human nature is in us inbuilt into us from when God created us.…

    • 1800 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Aristotle’s second appeal is logos. Logos is the appeal to logic. Martin Luther King was an excellent speaker and appealed to the logical side of most people. His essay took his knowledge and his talent of persuasion and summed up what he was working for and what he believed in. In Kings speech he wrote this, “How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A law is a manmade code that squares with the moral law or law of god. An unjust law is a code out of harmony with the moral law.” (p. 215-216). He shows the difference between just and unjust appealing to the reader’s logical side. King believes that justice too long is justice denied.…

    • 727 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes vs Locke

    • 551 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes believed mankind good and evil depended on what the individual loved and hated. He believed that life in the state of nature is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." (119) Mankind was naturally equal in power of mind and body so no individual was capable of dominating another. In a strictly natural condition there was no justice or injustice because everyone had their right to seek and take whatever is good and dispose of whatever was bad for them. He was for absolute monarchy. Thomas Hobbes believed that “authoritarian governments were necessary to keep human beings’ worst impulses under control.”(119) He did not believe that a large group of men would agree with one and other and peacefully run a country. Hobbes opposed constitutionalism because of his pessimistic view of human nature. The passages in Hobbes writings show that he did not desire the possibility of anything like modern totalitarianism. For Hobbes, any division of power was an invitation to chaos.…

    • 551 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thomas Hobbes thought that there should be equal rights for all people. He also had thought that the community should have more say to pass laws. He stated that an absolute sovereignty was the best form of government because people were too greedy and cold hearted to naturally rule themselves. To ensure personal safety and prosperity, all "unalienable rights" should be surrendered to the monarch. He believed in a monarchy government and matter in motion was his philosophy.…

    • 612 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Aristotle bases his idea of just and unjust law on society’s understanding of why the law exists. Ideal democracy, as we discussed in class, consists of citizens in a society being almost completely informed, educated, and involved in politics and the lawmaking process. As also stated, Democracy can pose a problem to leaders, since the public is knowledgeable. The ignorant are easier to manipulate and hide unjust law from, like in Martin Luther King, Jr’s current segregated society.…

    • 619 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes doctrine the Leviathan based on his social contract theories. As the book was written in the midst of a civil war much of it focuses on the need of a strong central authority to avoid discord and civil war. In his Leviathan Hobbes hypothesizes what life would be like without government, also known as state of nature. In this state each person would have a certain right, or license to all . This would eventually lead to a “bellum omnium contra omnes” or war against all, and people would love solitary, poor, short lives. In order to avoid this he states that man needs to agree to a social contract and establish civil society. Hobbes states that “society is a population beneath a sovereign authority, to whom all individuals in that society cede their natural rights for the sake of protection”. This means that man gives up some of his natural right to the sovereign in exchange for protection and order, and any misuse of this power is to be acknowledged as the price of peace, although in extreme cases rebellion is to be expected. The sovereign is in charge of and must control civil, military, judicial, and ecclesiastical powers. To prove this Hobbes said "If men are naturally in a state of war, why do they always carry arms and why do they have keys to lock their doors? "…

    • 508 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes

    • 673 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Natural and inherently known by all because it can be deduced by innate mental faculties (reason, philosophy).…

    • 673 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Natural Law has roots that stem back to Ancient Greece, and it was Aristotle who really created the approach. It was also depicted in Sophocles’ play Antigone, where the protagonist claims her right to bury her brother despite the King (Creon) ordering that he be fed to dogs. Antigone, (the protagonist) proclaimed this because she believed that there was a higher law than the King’s, particularly, Natural Law. However, it was not until the 13th Century until Thomas Aquinas developed its key features, that it was actually more widely recognised as a moral theory. When we focus on the recipient of the natural law, that is, us human beings, the proposition of Aquinas's natural law theory that comes to the forefront is that the Natural law establishes the basic principles of practical rationality for human beings, and has this status by Nature. These are to be followed universally, as Cicero puts it; it is ‘one eternal and unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all times’.…

    • 922 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Aristotle, a Greek philosopher, was born 384 years before Christ (BC). He separated justice into two parts – distributive justice and corrective justice. Distributive justice is concerned with the fair distribution of society’s wealth. He went onto say that this wealth should be spread according to merit and an individual’s contributions into society. So this system relies on giving to those who have contributed in some way rather than to those who are needy. Aristotle said that distribution on the basis of people needs merely rewards the lazy and so would be unjust. Corrective justice he said, is needed to ensure that individuals can keep their entitlements. He believed that if someone is to steal from another the court should ensure that the offender does not gain and the victim does not lose out. This idea can still be seen in areas of law such as compensatory damages for negligence.…

    • 3979 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    No one doubts the existence of positive law (hereafter PL), but we wonder about its rightness. No one doubts the rightness of natural law (hereafter NL), but many wonder if it actually exists. PL exists even when unjust, but for NL to exist it is not enough to be just. One way of comparison between them may be articulating the notion of the existence of law or its being in force. Being in force of the intrinsic value per se, i.e. in virtue of its moral merits, has been distinguished from being in force as formal validity and from being in force as factual existence. But this is not very convincing, because a norm that was valid only axiologically and was not part of a normative system in some way effective would be pure and simple morality and nothing else. Law, unlike morality, requires some degree of factual existence. One of the few cases of “existence” of NL that we know of is the Nuremberg Tribunal, which condemned Nazi leaders for having obeyed unjust positive laws, i.e., for having violated NL though obeying PL, according to Radbruch’s Formula which states that where statutory law is intolerably incompatible with the requirements of justice, statutory law must be disregarded in favour of justice (Radbruch 19565, 345).…

    • 878 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The sociology of law (or legal sociology) is often described as a sub-discipline of sociology or an interdisciplinary approach within legal studies. While some socio-legal scholars see the sociology of law as "necessarily" belonging to the discipline of sociology, others see it as a field of research caught up in the disciplinary tensions and competitions between the two established disciplines of law and sociology. Yet, others regard it neither as a sub-discipline of sociology nor as a branch of legal studies and, instead, present it as a field of research on its own right within a broader social science tradition. For example, Roger Cotterrell describes the sociology of law without reference to mainstream sociology as "the systematic, theoretically grounded, empirical study of law as a set of social practices or as an aspect or field of social experience".…

    • 2241 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays