Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Two Approaches to Natural Law

Two Approaches to Natural Law NOTES All authors agree not concerning the definition of the natural law, who notwithstanding do very often make use of this term in their writings. THI S SENTENCE from Thomas Hobbes was true when he wrote it and it is still true. Natural law, as th e term is used by moral, legal and social theorists, has a wide variety of meanings. It is not th e purpose of this note to detail the extent and history of these ambiguities, though such a study would have practical value. Rather, I should like to describe two contrasting attitudes toward natural law to suggest that one is better than the other. In what follows, references to certain writers in the history of philosophy are used for illustrative purposes only, not to condemn or approve their theories, or to demonstrate my point by any appeal to their authority. As a matter of historical fact, some of them (Hobbes is a good example) use both approaches. For the^sake of clarity, let us call these ap- proaches A and B. In approach A, natura l law is considered to be a set of rules or precepts con- veyed to man by immediate inspiration. This http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png American Journal of Jurisprudence Oxford University Press

Two Approaches to Natural Law

Bourke, Vernon J.
American Journal of Jurisprudence , Volume 1 (1) – Jan 1, 1956
Download PDF
5 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/two-approaches-to-natural-law-jgxkKCe1rD
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© 1956 by The University of Notre Dame
ISSN
0065-8995
eISSN
2049-6494
DOI
10.1093/ajj/1.1.92
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

NOTES All authors agree not concerning the definition of the natural law, who notwithstanding do very often make use of this term in their writings. THI S SENTENCE from Thomas Hobbes was true when he wrote it and it is still true. Natural law, as th e term is used by moral, legal and social theorists, has a wide variety of meanings. It is not th e purpose of this note to detail the extent and history of these ambiguities, though such a study would have practical value. Rather, I should like to describe two contrasting attitudes toward natural law to suggest that one is better than the other. In what follows, references to certain writers in the history of philosophy are used for illustrative purposes only, not to condemn or approve their theories, or to demonstrate my point by any appeal to their authority. As a matter of historical fact, some of them (Hobbes is a good example) use both approaches. For the^sake of clarity, let us call these ap- proaches A and B. In approach A, natura l law is considered to be a set of rules or precepts con- veyed to man by immediate inspiration. This

Journal

American Journal of Jurisprudence – Oxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 1956

There are no references for this article.