철학/법철학

Natural law

이덕휴-dhleepaul 2021. 2. 10. 16:23

Natural law자연법

System of law that purports to be determined by nature, and thus be universal자연에 의해 결정되기를 바라는 법 체계, 따라서 보편적이다.

Not to be confused with Natural justice.자연 정의와 혼동하지 말자.

For other uses, see Natural law (disambiguation).다른 용도는 자연법(해산)을 참조하십시오.

Thomas Aquinas, a Catholic philosopher of the Middle Ages, revived and developed the concept of natural law from ancient Greek philosophy중세 가톨릭 철학자 토머스 아퀴나스는 고대 그리스 철학에서 자연법 개념을 부활시켜 발전시켰다.

Natural law (Latin: ius naturale, lex naturalis) is a system of law based on a close observation of human nature, and based on values intrinsic to human nature that can be deduced and applied independent of positive law (the enacted laws of a state or society).자연법(라틴어: ius naturale, 렉스 naturalis)은 인간 본성에 대한 면밀한 관찰에 근거한 법 체계로서, 양성법(국가나 사회의 제정법)과는 무관하게 추론하고 적용할 수 있는 인간 본성에 내재된 가치에 근거한다. According to natural law theory, all people have inherent rights, conferred not by act of legislation but by "God, nature, or reason". 자연법 이론에 따르면, 모든 사람들은 입법 행위가 아닌 "신, 자연, 이성"에 의해 부여된 고유의 권리를 가지고 있다. Natural law theory can also refer to "theories of ethics, theories of politics, theories of civil law, and theories of religious morality". 자연법 이론은 또한 "윤리론, 정치론, 민법론, 종교도덕론"을 언급할 수 있다.

Natural law has roots in Western philosophy.자연법은 서양철학에 뿌리를 두고 있다. In the Western tradition it was anticipated by the Pre-Socratics, for example in their search for principles that governed the cosmos and human beings. 서양의 전통에서 그것은 예를 들어 우주와 인간을 지배하는 원리를 찾는데 있어서 Pre-Socratics에 의해 기대되었다. The concept of natural law was documented in ancient Greek philosophy, including Aristotle, and was referred to in ancient Roman philosophy by Cicero. 자연법칙의 개념은 아리스토텔레스를 포함한 고대 그리스 철학에 기록되어 있으며, 키케로가 고대 로마 철학에 언급하였다. References to it are also to be found in the Old and New Testaments of the Bible, and were later expounded upon in the Middle Ages by Christian philosophers such as Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas. 그것에 대한 언급은 성경의 구약과 신약에서도 찾아볼 수 있으며, 나중에 알버트 대왕과 토마스 아퀴나스와 같은 기독교 철학자들에 의해 중세 시대에 상세히 설명되었다. The School of Salamanca made notable contributions during the Renaissance. 살라망카 학교는 르네상스 시대에 주목할 만한 공헌을 했다.

Modern natural law theories were greatly developed in the Age of Enlightenment, combining inspiration from Roman law with philosophies like social contract theory.근대 자연법 이론은 계몽주의 시대에 로마법의 영감과 사회적 계약 이론과 같은 철학을 결합하여 크게 발전되었다. It was used in challenging theory of the divine right of kings, and became an alternative justification for the establishment of a social contract, positive law, and government—and thus legal rights—in the form of classical republicanism. 그것은 왕의 신권에 대한 도전적인 이론에 사용되었고, 고전적인 공화주의의 형태로 사회적 계약, 긍정적인 법과 정부, 그리고 따라서 법적 권리를 확립하는 대안적인 명분이 되었다. In the early decades of the 21st century, the concept of natural law is closely related to the concept of natural rights. 21세기 초 수십 년 동안 자연법칙의 개념은 자연권 개념과 밀접한 관련이 있다. Indeed, many philosophers, jurists and scholars use natural law synonymously with natural rights (Latin: ius naturale), or natural justice, though others distinguish between natural law and natural right. 실제로 많은 철학자, 법학자, 학자들은 자연법과 자연권을 구분하는 사람들이 있지만 자연법칙(라틴어: ius naturale), 즉 자연 정의와 동의어로 자연법을 사용한다.

Because of the intersection between natural law and natural rights, natural law has been claimed or attributed as a key component in the Declaration of Independence (1776) of the United States, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789) of France, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) of the United Nations, as well as자연법과 자연권의 교차점 때문에 자연법은 미국의 독립선언서(1776년), 프랑스의 인권선언서(1789년), 유엔의 세계인권선언서(1948년) 등에서 핵심요소로 주장되거나 귀속돼 왔다. the European Convention on Human Rights (1953) of the Council of Europe. 유럽 평의회의 유럽 인권 조약(1953년)

History역사

Ancient Greece고대 그리스

Plato플라톤

Although Plato did not have an explicit theory of natural law (he rarely used the phrase 'natural law' except in Gorgias 484 and Timaeus 83e), his concept of nature, according to John Wild, contains some of the elements found in many natural law theories.플라톤은 자연법칙에 대한 노골적인 이론을 가지고 있지 않았지만(고르기아스 484와 티메우스 83e를 제외하고는 '자연법'이라는 문구를 거의 사용하지 않았다), 존 와일드(John Wild)에 따르면 그의 자연에 대한 개념은 많은 자연법 이론에서 발견되는 요소들을 포함하고 있다. According to Plato, we live in an orderly universe. 플라톤에 따르면, 우리는 질서정연한 우주에 살고 있다. The basis of this orderly universe or nature are the forms, most fundamentally the Form of the Good, which Plato describes as "the brightest region of Being". 이 질서 정연한 우주나 자연의 기본은 형태, 가장 근본적으로 플라톤이 "존재의 가장 밝은 지역"이라고 묘사하는 선의 형태다. The Form of the Good is the cause of all things, and when it is seen it leads a person to act wisely. 선의 형태는 만물의 원인이며, 그것이 보이면 사람이 현명하게 행동하도록 이끈다. In the Symposium, the Good is closely identified with the Beautiful. 심포지엄에서 굿은 미녀와 밀접한 관계가 있다. In the Symposium, Plato describes how the experience of the Beautiful by Socrates enabled him to resist the temptations of wealth and sex. 플라톤은 심포지엄에서 소크라테스의 아름다운 경험으로 어떻게 부와 성의 유혹에 저항할 수 있었는지 묘사한다. In the Republic, the ideal community is "a city which would be established in accordance with nature". 공화국에서 이상적인 공동체는 "자연에 따라 세워질 도시"이다.

Aristotle아리스토텔레스

See also:참고 항목: Treatise on Law § Natural law § 자연법칙에 관한 논문

Plato (left) and Aristotle (right), a detail of The School of Athens, a fresco by Raphael.라파엘의 프레스코화인 <아테네 학교>의 디테일인 플라톤(왼쪽)과 아리스토텔레스(오른쪽)가 있다.

Greek philosophy emphasized the distinction between "nature" (physis, φúσις) on the one hand and "law", "custom", or "convention" (nomos, νóμος) on the other.그리스 철학은 한편으로는 '자연'(physis, φuις)을, 다른 한편으로는 '법'(law), '관습(custom)' 또는 '컨벤션'(nomos, νμμ)의 구별을 강조했다. What the law commanded would be expected to vary from place to place, but what was "by nature" should be the same everywhere. 법이 명령한 것은 장소마다 다를 것으로 예상되지만, '본성별'이었던 것은 어디에서나 똑같아야 한다. A "law of nature" would therefore have the flavor more of a paradox than something that obviously existed. 그러므로 "자연의 법칙"은 분명히 존재하는 어떤 것보다 더 역설적인 맛을 가지고 있을 것이다. Against the conventionalism that the distinction between nature and custom could engender, Socrates and his philosophic heirs, Plato and Aristotle, posited the existence of natural justice or natural right (dikaion physikon, δίκαιον φυσικόν, Latin ius naturale). 자연과 관습의 구분이 잉태할 수 있다는 관습주의에 맞서 소크라테스와 그의 철학 계승자인 플라톤과 아리스토텔레스는 자연 정의나 자연 권리(다이카온 피시콘, Δαανννν νυκ i, 라틴 ius naturale)의 존재를 내세웠다. Of these, Aristotle is often said to be the father of natural law. 이 가운데 아리스토텔레스는 자연법의 아버지라고 하는 경우가 많다.

Aristotle's association with natural law may be due to the interpretation given to his works by Thomas Aquinas.아리스토텔레스가 자연법과 결부한 것은 토마스 아퀴나스의 작품에 주어진 해석 때문일 것이다. But whether Aquinas correctly read Aristotle is in dispute. 그러나 아퀴나스가 아리스토텔레스를 정확히 읽었는지 여부는 논쟁 중이다. According to some, Aquinas conflates natural law and natural right, the latter of which Aristotle posits in Book V of the Nicomachean Ethics (Book IV of the Eudemian Ethics). 일부에 따르면 아퀴나스는 자연법과 자연권을 혼동하고 있는데, 그 중 후자는 아리스토텔레스가 니코마체안 윤리학 제5권(유데미안 윤리학 제4권)에 상정하고 있다. According to this interpretation, Aquinas's influence was such as to affect a number of early translations of these passages in an unfortunate manner, though more recent translations render those more literally. 이 해석에 따르면, 아퀴나스의 영향력은 비록 더 최근의 번역이 더 말 그대로 표현하기는 하지만, 불행하게도 이러한 구절의 많은 초기 번역에 영향을 미치는 것과 같았다. Aristotle notes that natural justice is a species of political justice, specifically the scheme of distributive and corrective justice that would be established under the best political community; were this to take the form of law, this could be called a natural law, though Aristotle does not discuss this and suggests in the Politics that the best 아리스토텔레스는 자연 정의는 정치 정의의 한 종이며, 특히 최고의 정치 공동체 아래 확립될 분배 정의와 시정 정의의 계획이라는 점에 주목한다; 이것이 법의 형태를 취한다면, 아리스토텔레스는 이것을 논하지 않고 정치에서 최고라고 제안하지만, 이것은 자연 법칙이라고 불릴 수 있다. regime may not rule by law at all. 정권은 전혀 법으로 통치하지 않을 수도 있다.

The best evidence of Aristotle's having thought there was a natural law comes from the Rhetoric, where Aristotle notes that, aside from the "particular" laws that each people has set up for itself, there is a "common" law that is according to nature.아리스토텔레스가 자연 법칙이 있다고 생각했다는 가장 좋은 증거는, 아리스토텔레스가 각자가 스스로 설정한 "중요한" 법칙과는 별도로, 자연에 따른 "공통적인" 법칙이 존재한다고 지적하는 수사학에서 나온다. Specifically, he quotes Sophocles and Empedocles: 특히 그는 소포클레스와 엠페도클레스를 인용한다.

Some critics believe that the context of this remark suggests only that Aristotle advised that it could be rhetorically advantageous to appeal to such a law, especially when the "particular" law of one's own city was averse to the case being made, not that there actually was such a law; Moreover, they claim that Aristotle considered two of the thre일부 비평가들은 이 말의 맥락이 아리스토텔레스가 특히 자기 도시의 "중요한" 법칙이 실제로 그런 법이 있었다는 것이 아니라 만들어진 사건에 반대했을 때 그러한 법칙에 호소하는 것이 수사적으로 유리할 수 있다고 충고했을 뿐이라고 믿는다. 더욱이 그들은 아리스토텔레스가 3개의 법칙 중 2개를 고려했다고 주장한다.e candidates for a universally valid, natural law provided in this passage to be wrong.e 이 단락에서 제시된 보편적으로 타당한 자연 법칙에 대한 후보자는 틀렸다. Aristotle's paternity of natural law tradition is consequently disputed. 아리스토텔레스의 자연법칙 전통의 친자 관계는 결과적으로 논쟁의 여지가 있다.

Stoic natural law스토아 자연법

The development of this tradition of natural justice into one of natural law is usually attributed to the Stoics.이러한 자연 정의의 전통이 자연법칙의 하나로 발전한 것은 대개 스토이크족의 덕택이다. The rise of natural law as a universal system coincided with the rise of large empires and kingdoms in the Greek world.[full citation needed] 자연법이 보편적 제도로서 부상한 것은 그리스 세계의 큰 제국과 왕국이 부상한 것과 때를 같이한다.[full citation needed] Whereas the "higher" law that Aristotle suggested one could appeal to was emphatically natural, in contradistinction to being the result of divine positive legislation, the Stoic natural law was indifferent to either the natural or divine source of the law: the Stoics asserted the existence of a rational and purposeful order to the universe (a div 아리스토텔레스가 호소할 수 있다고 제안한 "높은" 법칙은 신성한 긍정적 입법의 결과물이라는 것과 대조되는, 강조 자연 법칙은 그 법칙의 자연적 원천이나 신적 원천에 무관심했던 반면, 스토이크 자연 법칙은 우주에 대한 합리적이고 목적적 질서의 존재를 주장했다(점).ine or eternal law), and the means by which a rational being lived in accordance with this order was the natural law, which inspired actions that accorded with virtue.ine 또는 영원한 법칙), 그리고 이 질서에 따라 이성적인 존재가 살아가는 수단은 자연법칙으로, 덕에 부합하는 행동에 영감을 주었다.

As the English historian A. J. Carlyle (1861–1943) notes:영국의 역사학자 A. J. 칼라일(1861–1943)은 다음과 같이 언급하고 있다.

Natural law first appeared among the stoics who believed that God is everywhere and in everyone (see classical pantheism).자연법은 신이 어디에나 있고 누구에게나 있다고 믿었던 스토아들 사이에서 처음 나타났다(고전 팬티즘 참조). According to this belief, within humans there is a "divine spark" which helps them to live in accordance with nature. 이 믿음에 따르면, 인간 내부에는 자연에 따라 살 수 있도록 도와주는 "분열 불꽃"이 있다. The stoics felt that there was a way in which the universe had been designed, and that natural law helped us to harmonise with this. 스토아 학자들은 우주를 설계한 방법이 있다고 느꼈고, 자연 법칙이 이것과 조화를 이루는데 도움을 주었다.

Ancient Rome고대 로마

Marcus Tullius Cicero마르쿠스 툴리우스 시케로

Cicero wrote in his De Legibus that both justice and law originate from what nature has given to humanity, from what the human mind embraces, from the function of humanity, and from what serves to unite humanity.키케로는 드 레기버스(De Legibus)에서 정의와 법 모두 자연이 인류에게 부여한 것, 인간의 마음이 포용하는 것, 인류의 기능, 그리고 인류를 통합하는 데 기여하는 것에서 유래한다고 썼다. For Cicero, natural law obliges us to contribute to the general good of the larger society. 키케로에게 자연법은 우리가 더 큰 사회의 일반적인 이익에 기여하도록 의무화한다. The purpose of positive laws is to provide for "the safety of citizens, the preservation of states, and the tranquility and happiness of human life." 긍정적 법률의 목적은 "시민의 안전, 국가의 보존, 인간 생활의 평온과 행복"을 규정하는 것이다. In this view, "wicked and unjust statutes" are "anything but 'laws,'" because "in the very definition of the term 'law' there inheres the idea and principle of choosing what is just and true." 이러한 관점에서, "위선되고 부당한 법령"은 "법"이라는 용어의 정의에서 정의롭고 진실된 것을 선택하는 사상과 원칙을 고수하기 때문에 "법"이 아닌 "법"이다. Law, for Cicero, "ought to be a reformer of vice and an incentive to virtue." 법, 치케로에게는 "악의 개혁자가 되고 덕을 쌓는 동기"가 될 생각이었다. Cicero expressed the view that "the virtues which we ought to cultivate, always tend to our own happiness, and that the best means of promoting them consists in living with men in that perfect union and charity which are cemented by mutual benefits." 키케로는 "우리가 길러야 할 덕목들은 항상 우리 자신의 행복을 추구하며, 그것들을 촉진하는 최선의 수단은 상호 이익에 의해 굳어진 그 완벽한 결합과 자선 안에서 남자들과 함께 사는 데 있다"는 견해를 밝혔다.

In De Re Publica, he writes:드 르 푸르블라에서 그는 다음과 같이 쓰고 있다.

Cicero influenced the discussion of natural law for many centuries to come, up through the era of the American Revolution.키케로는 미국 혁명 시대를 거치면서 앞으로 수세기 동안 자연법칙 논의에 영향을 주었다. The jurisprudence of the Roman Empire was rooted in Cicero, who held "an extraordinary grip ... 로마 제국의 법학은 "비범한 지배력"을 가진 키케로에 뿌리를 두고 있었다. upon the imagination of posterity" as "the medium for the propagation of those ideas which informed the law and institutions of the empire." "제국의 법과 제도를 알린 그러한 사상의 전파를 위한 매개체"로서 후세의 상상력에 근거하여. Cicero's conception of natural law "found its way to later centuries notably through the writings of Saint Isidore of Seville and the Decretum of Gratian." 키케로의 자연법칙에 대한 개념은 "세빌의 성 이시도레와 그라티아인의 십일조를 통해 특히 후세기로 나아갔다"고 말했다. Thomas Aquinas, in his summary of medieval natural law, quoted Cicero's statement that "nature" and "custom" were the sources of a society's laws. 토마스 아퀴나스는 중세 자연법 요약에서 "자연"과 "관습"이 한 사회의 법칙의 근원이라는 시케로의 진술을 인용했다.

The Renaissance Italian historian Leonardo Bruni praised Cicero as the person "who carried philosophy from Greece to Italy, and nourished it with the golden river of his eloquence."르네상스 시대 이탈리아 역사학자 레오나르도 브루니는 키케로를 "그리스에서 이탈리아로 철학을 운반하고, 그의 웅변의 황금강으로 양성한 사람"이라고 칭송했다. The legal culture of Elizabethan England, exemplified by Sir Edward Coke, was "steeped in Ciceronian rhetoric." 에드워드 코카콜라 경에 의해 예시된 엘리자베스 여왕 시대의 영국의 법문화는 "시케로니아식 미사여구에 조예가 깊다"고 했다. The Scottish moral philosopher Francis Hutcheson, as a student at Glasgow, "was attracted most by Cicero, for whom he always professed the greatest admiration." 스코틀랜드의 도덕철학자 프랜시스 허치슨은 글래스고의 학생으로서 "가장 큰 찬사를 표했던 키케로에게 가장 끌렸다"고 말했다. More generally in eighteenth-century Great Britain, Cicero's name was a household word among educated people. 보다 일반적으로 18세기 영국에서는 키케로의 이름이 교육받은 사람들 사이에서 유행어였다. Likewise, "in the admiration of early Americans Cicero took pride of place as orator, political theorist, stylist, and moralist." 마찬가지로, "초창기 미국인들의 감탄 속에서 키케로는 웅변가, 정치 이론가, 스타일리스트, 도덕가로서의 자리를 자부했다."

The British polemicist Thomas Gordon "incorporated Cicero into the radical ideological tradition that travelled from the mother country to the colonies in the course of the eighteenth century and decisively shaped early American political culture."영국의 극작가 토마스 고든은 "시케로를 18세기 동안 모국에서 식민지로 이동한 급진적인 이념 전통에 편입시켜 미국의 초기 정치 문화를 결정적으로 형성했다"고 말했다. Cicero's description of the immutable, eternal, and universal natural law was quoted by Burlamaqui and later by the American revolutionary legal scholar James Wilson. 불변하고 영원하며 보편적인 자연법에 대한 시케로의 묘사는 불라마키와 후에 미국의 혁명적인 법률학자 제임스 윌슨이 인용했다. Cicero became John Adams's "foremost model of public service, republican virtue, and forensic eloquence." 키케로는 존 애덤스의 "최고의 공공서비스, 공화주의 덕목, 법의학적 웅변 모델"이 되었다. Adams wrote of Cicero that "as all the ages of the world have not produced a greater statesman and philosopher united in the same character, his authority should have great weight." 아담스는 시케로에 대해 "세계의 모든 연령대가 같은 인격으로 뭉친 위대한 정치가와 철학자를 배출하지 못했기 때문에 그의 권위는 큰 비중을 가져야 한다"고 썼다. Thomas Jefferson "first encountered Cicero as a schoolboy while learning Latin, and continued to read his letters and discourses throughout his life. 토마스 제퍼슨은 "라틴어를 배우던 중 학창 시절 키케로를 처음 접했고, 평생 그의 편지와 담론을 계속 읽었다. He admired him as a patriot, valued his opinions as a moral philosopher, and there is little doubt that he looked upon Cicero's life, with his love of study and aristocratic country life, as a model for his own." Jefferson described Cicero as "the father of eloquence and philosophy." 그는 그를 애국자로 존경했고, 도덕철학자로서 자신의 의견을 중시했으며, 공부와 귀족적인 시골 생활을 자신의 모범으로 삼았다는 것에는 의심의 여지가 거의 없다."제퍼슨은 키케로를 "언변과 철학의 아버지"라고 묘사했다.

Christianity기독교

The New Testament carries a further exposition on the Abrahamic dialogue and links to the later Greek exposition on the subject, when Paul's Epistle to the Romans states: "For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:신약성경에는 아브라함 대화와 관련된 추가 설명과 이 문제에 대한 그리스 후기 설명회가 있는데, 바울이 로마에 보낸 서간에서 다음과 같이 언급하였다: "법도 없는 이방인들이 본래 율법에 포함된 일을 할 때, 율법도 없는 것은 율법 그 자체로 율법이다. Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another." 그들의 마음 속에 기록된 율법의 일과, 그들의 양심에도 증인이 있고, 그 동안에 서로 고발하거나 다른 것을 용서하는 그들의 생각들이 있다.' The intellectual historian A. J. Carlyle has commented on this passage, "There can be little doubt that St Paul's words imply some conception analogous to the 'natural law' in Cicero, a law written in men's hearts, recognized by man's reason, a law distinct from the positive law of any State, or from what St Paul recognized as the revealed law of 지적 역사학자 A. J. 칼릴레는 이 구절에 대해 "성 바울의 말이 키케로의 '자연법'과 유사한 어떤 개념을 내포하고 있으며, 인간의 이성에 의해 인정되고, 어떤 국가의 양성법과도 구별되는 법, 또는 성 바울이 공개한 법으로 인정한 법률과 유사한 개념을 내포하고 있는 것은 거의 의심할 여지가 없다.God. It is in this sense that St Paul's words are taken by the Fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries like St Hilary of Poitiers, St Ambrose, and St Augustine, and there seems no reason to doubt the correctness of their interpretation."하나님. 이런 의미에서 성 바울의 말은 포이티어의 성 힐라리, 성 암브로즈, 성 아우구스티누스처럼 4세기와 5세기의 아버지들에게 받아들여지고 있으며, 그들의 해석의 정확성을 의심할 이유가 없어 보인다."

Because of its origins in the Old Testament, early Church Fathers, especially those in the West, saw natural law as part of the natural foundation of Christianity.구약성경에서 기원했기 때문에, 초기 교회 아버지들, 특히 서양의 아버지들은 자연법을 기독교의 자연적 토대의 일부로 보았다. The most notable among these was Augustine of Hippo, who equated natural law with humanity's prelapsarian state; as such, a life according to unbroken human nature was no longer possible and persons needed instead to seek healing and salvation through the divine law and grace of Jesus Christ. 이 가운데 가장 눈에 띄는 것은 자연법을 인류의 원장님 상태와 동일시하는 히포 아우구스티누스였다.그러므로 더 이상 파괴되지 않은 인간의 본성에 따른 삶은 불가능했고 대신 예수 그리스도의 신법과 은총을 통해 치유와 구원을 모색할 필요가 있었다.

The natural law was inherently teleological, however, it is most assuredly not deontological.자연 법칙은 본질적으로 원격론적이었지만, 가장 확실히 그것은 신학적이지는 않다. For Christians, natural law is how human beings manifest the divine image in their life. 기독교인들에게 자연법은 인간이 어떻게 그들의 삶에서 신성한 이미지를 나타내느냐 하는 것이다. This mimicry of God's own life is impossible to accomplish except by means of the power of grace. 하나님 자신의 삶을 이렇게 흉내내는 것은 은혜의 힘으로 하는 것 외에는 성취할 수 없다. Thus, whereas deontological systems merely require certain duties be performed, Christianity explicitly states that no one can, in fact, perform any duties if grace is lacking. 그러므로 신학 체계는 단지 특정한 의무만을 수행하도록 요구하는 반면, 기독교는 사실 은혜가 부족하면 그 누구도 어떤 의무도 수행할 수 없다고 명시하고 있다. For Christians, natural law flows not from divine commands, but from the fact that humanity is made in God's image, humanity is empowered by God's grace. 기독교인들에게 자연법은 신의 계명에서 나오는 것이 아니라, 인간의 모습이 하나님의 형상에서 만들어진다는 사실에서 나오는 것이며, 하나님의 은혜로 인류가 힘을 얻는다. Living the natural law is how humanity displays the gifts of life and grace, the gifts of all that is good. 자연 법칙을 사는 것은 인류가 생명과 은총의 선물, 선한 모든 것의 선물을 어떻게 보여주는가 하는 것이다. Consequences are in God's hands, consequences are generally not within human control, thus in natural law, actions are judged by three things: (1) the person's intent, (2) the circumstances of the act and (3) the nature of the act. 결과는 신의 손에 있고, 결과는 일반적으로 인간의 통제 안에 있지 않기 때문에 자연법칙에서는 행동이 세 가지로 판단된다. (1) 사람의 의도, (2) 행동의 상황, (3) 행동의 본질. The apparent good or evil consequence resulting from the moral act is not relevant to the act itself. 도덕적 행위에서 비롯되는 명백한 선악적 결과는 행위 자체와 관련이 없다. The specific content of the natural law is therefore determined by how each person's acts mirror God's internal life of love. 그러므로 자연법의 구체적인 내용은 각 개인의 행위가 하나님의 내적 사랑의 삶을 어떻게 반영하느냐에 따라 결정된다. Insofar as one lives the natural law, temporal satisfaction may or may not be attained, but salvation will be attained. 자연법을 살아가는 한 일시적 만족은 얻어질 수도, 얻지 못할 수도 있지만 구원은 얻어질 것이다. The state, in being bound by the natural law, is conceived as an institution whose purpose is to assist in bringing its subjects to true happiness. 국가는 자연법에 얽매이는 데 있어서, 그 대상을 진정한 행복으로 이끄는 데 도움을 주는 것을 목적으로 하는 기관으로 간주된다. True happiness derives from living in harmony with the mind of God as an image of the living God. 참된 행복은 살아 계신 하나님의 이미지로 하나님의 마음과 조화를 이루며 사는 데서 비롯된다.

After the Protestant Reformation, some Protestant denominations maintained parts of the Catholic concept of natural law.개신교 개혁 이후 일부 개신교 교파는 가톨릭의 자연법 개념 일부를 유지했다. The English theologian Richard Hooker from the Church of England adapted Thomistic notions of natural law to Anglicanism five principles: to live, to learn, to reproduce, to worship God, and to live in an ordered society.[irrelevant citation] 영국 교회의 영국 신학자 리처드 후커는 자연법칙에 대한 토미즘적 개념을 성공회에 적용했다: 사는 것, 배우는 것, 번식하는 것, 신을 숭배하는 것, 질서 있는 사회에서 사는 것.[irrelevant citation]

Catholic natural law jurisprudence가톨릭 자연법 법학

See also:참고 항목: Treatise on Law and Determinatio 법률 및 결정론

Albertus Magnus, O.P. (c. 1200–1280).알베르투스 마그누스, O.P. (c. 1200–1280).

Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274).토마스 아퀴나스(125–1274)

.mw-parser-output .sidebar{width:22em;float:right;clear:right;margin:.5em 0 1em 1em;background:#f8f9fa;border:1px solid #aaa;padding:.2em;border-spacing:.4em 0;text-align:center;line-height:1.4em;font-size:88%}.mw-parser-output .sidebar a{white-space:nowrap}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-wraplinks a{white-space:normal}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-subgroup{width:100%;margin:0;border-spacing:0}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-left{float:left;clear:left;margin:.5em 1em 1em 0}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-none{float:none;clear:both;margin:.5em 1em 1em 0}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-outer-title{padding-bottom:.2em;font-size:125%;line-height:1.2em;font-weight:700}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-top-image{padding:.4em 0}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-caption,.mw-parser-output .sidebar-pretitle-with-top-image,.mw-parser-output .sidebar-top-caption{padding-top:.2em;line-height:1.2em}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-pretitle{padding-top:.4em;line-height:1.2em}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-title,.mw-parser-output .sidebar-title-with-pretitle{padding:.2em .4em;font-size:145%;line-height:1.2em}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-title-with-pretitle{padding-top:0}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-image{padding:.2em 0 .4em}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-heading{padding:.1em}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-content{padding:0 .1em .4em}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-content-with-subgroup{padding:.1em 0 .2em}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-above,.mw-parser-output .sidebar-below{padding:.3em .4em;font-weight:700}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-collapse .sidebar-above,.mw-parser-output .sidebar-collapse .sidebar-below{border-top:1px solid #aaa;border-bottom:1px solid #aaa}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-navbar{text-align:right;font-size:115%}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-collapse .sidebar-navbar{padding-top:.6em}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-collapse .mw-collapsible-toggle{margin-top:.2em}.mw-parser-output .sidebar-list-title{text-align:left;font-weight:700;line-height:1.6em;font-size:105%}@media(max-width:720px){body.mediawiki .mw-parser-output .sidebar{width:100%!important;clear:both;float:none;margin-left:0!important;margin-right:0!important}}

In the twelfth century, Gratian equated the natural law with divine law.12세기에 그라티안은 자연법과 신법을 동일시했다. Albertus Magnus would address the subject a century later, and his pupil, St. 알베르투스 마그누스는 한 세기 후에 이 문제를 다루게 될 것이고, 그의 제자 세인트. Thomas Aquinas, in his Summa Theologica I-II qq. 90–106, restored Natural Law to its independent state, asserting natural law as the rational creature's participation in the eternal law. 토마스 아퀴나스는 그의 Summa Therologica I-II q. 90–106에서 자연 법칙을 그 독립된 상태로 복원하여 자연 법칙을 이성적인 생물이 영원한 법칙에 참여하는 것으로 주장하였다. Yet, since human reason could not fully comprehend the Eternal law, it needed to be supplemented by revealed Divine law. (See also Biblical law in Christianity.) 그러나 인간의 이성은 영원의 법칙을 완전히 이해할 수 없었기 때문에, 드러난 신성한 법칙으로 보완할 필요가 있었다.(기독교의 성서법도 참조) Meanwhile, Aquinas taught that all human or positive laws were to be judged by their conformity to the natural law. 한편 아퀴나스는 모든 인간 또는 양성 법칙은 자연 법칙에 대한 순응으로 판단되어야 한다고 가르쳤다. An unjust law is not a law, in the full sense of the word. 불공평한 법은 법이 아니다, 그 말의 전체적 의미에서는. It retains merely the 'appearance' of law insofar as it is duly constituted and enforced in the same way a just law is, but is itself a 'perversion of law.' 그것은 정당한 법이라는 것과 같은 방식으로 정당하게 구성되고 집행되는 한 단지 법의 '존재'를 유지하고 있을 뿐 그 자체로 '법률의 변태'이다. At this point, the natural law was not only used to pass judgment on the moral worth of various laws, but also to determine what those laws meant in the first place. 이때 자연법은 여러 법률의 도덕적 가치에 대한 판단을 내리는 데만 쓰이지 않고, 애초에 그 법률이 의미하는 바를 결정하는 데에도 쓰였다. This principle laid the seed for possible societal tension with reference to tyrants. 이 원칙은 폭군들과 관련하여 가능한 사회적 긴장감의 씨앗이 되었다.

The Catholic Church holds the view of natural law introduced by Albertus Magnus and elaborated by Thomas Aquinas, particularly in his Summa Theologiae, and often as filtered through the School of Salamanca.가톨릭 교회는 알베르투스 마그누스에 의해 소개되고 토마스 아퀴나스에 의해 정교하게 묘사된 자연 법칙의 관점을 가지고 있으며, 특히 그의 수마 신학에서, 그리고 종종 살라망카 학교를 통해 걸러진다. This view is also shared by some Protestants, and was delineated by Anglican writer C. S. Lewis in his works Mere Christianity and The Abolition of Man. 이 견해는 일부 개신교 신자들에게도 공유되고 있으며, 성공회 작가 C. S. Lewis가 그의 저서 "단순한 기독교"와 "인간의 폐지"에서 서술하였다.

The Catholic Church understands human beings to consist of body and mind, the physical and the non-physical (or soul perhaps), and that the two are inextricably linked.가톨릭 교회는 인간을 육체와 정신, 육체와 비육체적(또는 영혼)으로 구성하도록 이해하고 있으며, 두 사람은 불가분의 관계에 있다고 이해한다. Humans are capable of discerning the difference between good and evil because they have a conscience. 인간은 양심이 있기 때문에 선과 악의 차이를 분별할 수 있다. There are many manifestations of the good that we can pursue. 우리가 추구할 수 있는 선의 많은 징후들이 있다. Some, like procreation, are common to other animals, while others, like the pursuit of truth, are inclinations peculiar to the capacities of human beings. 생식과 같은 어떤 것들은 다른 동물들에게 흔한 반면, 진리의 추구와 같은 다른 것들은 인간의 능력에 특유한 선입견이다.

To know what is right, one must use one's reason and apply it to Thomas Aquinas' precepts.무엇이 옳은지 알기 위해서는 자신의 이성을 발휘하여 토마스 아퀴나스의 계율에 적용해야 한다. This reason is believed to be embodied, in its most abstract form, in the concept of a primary precept: "Good is to be sought, evil avoided." St. 이 이유는 가장 추상적인 형태로 "선은 추구되어야 하고, 악은 피해야 한다"는 일차적 교훈의 개념으로 구체화되었다고 여겨진다. Thomas explains that: 토마스는 다음과 같이 설명한다.

However, while the primary and immediate precepts cannot be "blotted out", the secondary precepts can be.그러나 일차적, 즉적 계율은 '깜짝'할 수 없지만, 이차 계율은 그럴 수 있다. Therefore, for a deontological ethical theory they are open to a surprisingly large amount of interpretation and flexibility. 그러므로 신학적 윤리 이론의 경우 그들은 놀랄 만큼 많은 양의 해석과 융통성에 열려 있다. Any rule that helps humanity to live up to the primary or subsidiary precepts can be a secondary precept, for example: 인류가 일차적 또는 부차적 규범을 준수하도록 돕는 모든 규칙은 다음과 같은 부차적 규범이 될 수 있다.

  • Drunkenness is wrong because it injures one's health, and worse, destroys one's ability to reason, which is fundamental to humans as rational animals (i.e., does not support self-preservation).주정뱅이는 건강을 해치기 때문에 잘못된 것이고, 더 나쁜 것은 이성적인 동물로서 인간에게 기본이 되는 이성적인 동물(즉, 자기보존을 지지하지 않는다)으로서의 이치를 해치는 능력을 파괴하기 때문이다.
  • Theft is wrong because it destroys social relations, and humans are by nature social animals (i.e., does not support the subsidiary precept of living in society).도둑질은 사회적 관계를 파괴하고, 인간은 본래 사회적 동물(즉, 사회생활의 부차적 계율을 지지하지 않는 것)이기 때문에 잘못된 것이다.

Natural moral law is concerned with both exterior and interior acts, also known as action and motive.자연도덕법은 행동과 동기로도 알려진 외부 행위와 내부 행위 둘 다와 관련이 있다. Simply doing the right thing is not enough; to be truly moral one's motive must be right as well. 단순히 옳은 일을 하는 것만으로는 충분하지 않다. 진정으로 도덕적인 사람이 되기 위해서는 또한 옳은 일이 되어야 한다. For example, helping an old lady across the road (good exterior act) to impress someone (bad interior act) is wrong. 예를 들어, 길을 건너는 할머니를 도와 누군가를 감동시키는 것(외형적인 좋은 행동)은 잘못된 것이다. However, good intentions don't always lead to good actions. 그러나 좋은 의도가 항상 좋은 행동으로 이어지는 것은 아니다. The motive must coincide with the cardinal or theological virtues. 그 동기는 반드시 추기경이나 신학적 덕목과 일치해야 한다. Cardinal virtues are acquired through reason applied to nature; they are: 기본적인 미덕은 자연에 적용되는 이성을 통해 얻어진다; 그것들은 다음과 같다.

  1. Prudence상책
  2. Justice법무
  3. Temperance절주
  4. FortitudeFortitude

The theological virtues are:신학적 미덕은 다음과 같다.

  1. Faith신앙
  2. Hope호프
  3. Charity자선

According to Aquinas, to lack any of these virtues is to lack the ability to make a moral choice.아퀴나스에 따르면, 이러한 덕목들 중 어떤 것도 결여하는 것은 도덕적인 선택을 할 능력이 부족한 것이다. For example, consider a person who possesses the virtues of justice, prudence, and fortitude, yet lacks temperance. 예를 들어, 정의, 신중함, 강인함의 미덕을 가지고 있으면서도 절제가 부족한 사람을 생각해 보라. Due to their lack of self-control and desire for pleasure, despite their good intentions, they will find themself swaying from the moral path. 자기 통제와 쾌락에 대한 욕구가 부족하기 때문에 좋은 의도에도 불구하고 도덕적인 길에서 흔들리는 자신을 발견할 것이다.

In the 16th century, the School of Salamanca (Francisco Suárez, Francisco de Vitoria, etc.) further developed a philosophy of natural law.16세기 살라망카 학교(프란시스코 수아레스, 프란시스코 데 비토리아 등)는 자연법칙의 철학을 더욱 발전시켰다.

Islamic natural law이슬람 자연법

Further information:추가 정보: Fitra 피트라

Abū Rayhān al-Bīrūnī, a medieval scholar, scientist, and polymath, understood "natural law" as the survival of the fittest.중세의 학자, 과학자, 다산학자인 아부 라얀 알 뷔룬은 '자연법'을 적자생존으로 이해했다. He argued that the antagonism between human beings can be overcome only through a divine law, which he believed to have been sent through prophets. 그는 인간 사이의 반목은 예언자를 통해 보내졌다고 믿었던 신성한 법칙을 통해서만 극복할 수 있다고 주장했다. This is also said to be the general position of the Ashari school, the largest school of Sunni theology, as well as Ibn Hazm. 이 역시 이븐 하셈은 물론 수니파 신학의 최대 학교인 아사리파의 총체적 입장이라고 한다. Conceptualized thus, all "laws" are viewed as originating from subjective attitudes actuated by cultural conceptions and individual preferences, and so the notion of "divine revelation" is justified as some kind of "divine intervention" that replaces human positive laws, which are criticized as being relative, with a single divine positive law. 따라서 개념화하면 모든 '법칙'은 문화적 개념과 개인의 선호에 의해 작동되는 주관적 태도에서 비롯된 것으로 간주되고, 따라서 '분열적 폭로'라는 개념은 상대적이라는 비판을 받는 인간의 긍정적 법칙을 하나의 신성한 긍정적 법칙으로 대체하는 일종의 '분열적 개입'으로 정당화된다. This, however, also entails that anything may be included in "the divine law" as it would in "human laws", but unlike the latter, "God's law" is seen as binding regardless of the nature of the commands by virtue of "God's might": since God is not subject to human laws and conventions, He may command what He wills just as He may do what He wills. 그러나 이것은 또한 '인간법'에서처럼 '신법'에 어떤 것이라도 포함될 수 있다는 것을 수반하기도 하지만, 후자와는 달리 '신의 힘'에 의해 명령의 본질과 상관없이 구속력이 있는 것으로 간주된다: 신은 인간의 법과 규약을 따르지 않기 때문에, 그는 자신이 하고자 하는 것을 명령할 수도 있다.

The Maturidi school, the second-largest school of Sunni theology, as well as the Mu'tazilites, posits the existence of a form of natural, or "objective," law that humans can comprehend.무타질 사람뿐만 아니라 수니파 신학의 제2의 학교인 마투리디 학파는 인간이 이해할 수 있는 자연법, 즉 '객관적인' 법칙의 존재를 내세우고 있다. Abu Mansur al-Maturidi stated that the human mind could know of the existence of God and the major forms of "good" and "evil" without the help of revelation. 아부 만수르 알 마투리디는 인간의 마음이 폭로의 도움 없이도 신의 존재와 '선'과 '악'의 주요 형태를 알 수 있다고 말했다. Al-Maturidi gives the example of stealing, which, he believes, is known to be evil by reason alone due to people's working hard for their property. 알-마투리디는 도둑질을 예로 들며, 이는 사람들이 재산을 위해 열심히 일하기 때문에 이성만으로 악한 것으로 알려져 있다고 그는 믿고 있다. Similarly, killing, fornication, and drunkenness are all "discernible evils" that the human mind could know of according to al-Maturidi. 마찬가지로 살인과 간음, 취기는 모두 알-마투리디에 따르면 인간의 마음이 알 수 있는 '장애악'이다. Likewise, Averroes (Ibn Rushd), in his treatise on Justice and Jihad and his commentary on Plato's Republic, writes that the human mind can know of the unlawfulness of killing and stealing and thus of the five maqasid or higher intents of the Islamic sharia, or the protection of religion, life, property, offspring, and reason. 이와 마찬가지로, 그의 정의와 지하드에 관한 논문과 플라톤 공화국에 대한 논평에서, 인간 정신은 살인과 도둑질의 불법성, 그리고 따라서 이슬람 샤리아의 다섯 가지 이상의 마카시드적 또는 종교, 생명, 재산, 자손, 이성의 보호에 대해 알 수 있다고 쓰고 있다. His Aristotelian commentaries also influenced the subsequent Averroist movement and the writings of Thomas Aquinas. 그의 아리스토텔레스적 논평은 이후의 평균주의 운동과 토마스 아퀴나스의 저술에도 영향을 미쳤다.

Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya also posited that human reason could discern between "great sins" and "good deeds". Nonetheless, he, like Ibn Taymiyah, emphasized the authority of "divine revelation" and asserted that it must be followed even if it "seems" to contradict human reason, though he stressed that most, if not all, of "God's commands" are both sensible (that is, rationalizable) and advantageous to humans in both "this life" and "the hereafter".

The concept of Istislah in Islamic law bears some similarities to the natural law tradition in the West, as exemplified by Thomas Aquinas. However, whereas natural law deems good what is self-evidently good, according as it tends towards the fulfillment of the person, istislah typically calls good whatever is related to one of five "basic goods". Many jurists, theologians, and philosophers attempted to abstract these "basic and fundamental goods" from legal precepts. Al-Ghazali, for instance, defined them as religion, life, reason, lineage, and property, while others add "honor" also.

Brehon law

Early Irish law, An Senchus Mor (The Great Tradition) mentions in a number of places recht aicned or natural law. This is a concept predating European legal theory, and reflects a type of law that is universal and may be determined by reason and observation of natural action. Neil McLeod identifies concepts that law must accord with: fír (truth) and dliged (right or entitlement). These two terms occur frequently, though Irish law never strictly defines them. Similarly, the term córus (law in accordance with proper order) occurs in some places, and even in the titles of certain texts. These were two very real concepts to the jurists and the value of a given judgment with respect to them was apparently ascertainable. McLeod has also suggested that most of the specific laws mentioned have passed the test of time and thus their truth has been confirmed, while other provisions are justified in other ways because they are younger and have not been tested over time The laws were written in the oldest dialect of the Irish language, called Bérla Féini [Bairla-faina], which even at the time was so difficult that persons about to become brehons had to be specially instructed in it, the length of time from beginning to becoming a learned Brehon was usually 20 years. Although under the law any third person could fulfill the duty if both parties agreed, and both were sane. It has been included in an Ethno-Celtic breakaway subculture, as it has religious undertones and freedom of religious expression allows it to once again be used as a valid system in Western Europe.

English jurisprudence

Heinrich A. Rommen remarked upon "the tenacity with which the spirit of the English common law retained the conceptions of natural law and equity which it had assimilated during the Catholic Middle Ages, thanks especially to the influence of Henry de Bracton (d. 1268) and Sir John Fortescue (d. cir. 1476)." Bracton's translator notes that Bracton "was a trained jurist with the principles and distinctions of Roman jurisprudence firmly in mind"; but Bracton adapted such principles to English purposes rather than copying slavishly. In particular, Bracton turned the imperial Roman maxim that "the will of the prince is law" on its head, insisting that the king is under the law. The legal historian Charles F. Mullett has noted Bracton's "ethical definition of law, his recognition of justice, and finally his devotion to natural rights." Bracton considered justice to be the "fountain-head" from which "all rights arise." For his definition of justice, Bracton quoted the twelfth-century Italian jurist Azo: "'Justice is the constant and unfailing will to give to each his right.'" Bracton's work was the second legal treatise studied by the young apprentice lawyer Thomas Jefferson.

Fortescue stressed "the supreme importance of the law of God and of nature" in works that "profoundly influenced the course of legal development in the following centuries." The legal scholar Ellis Sandoz has noted that "the historically ancient and the ontologically higher law—eternal, divine, natural—are woven together to compose a single harmonious texture in Fortescue's account of English law." As the legal historian Norman Doe explains: "Fortescue follows the general pattern set by Aquinas. The objective of every legislator is to dispose people to virtue. It is by means of law that this is accomplished. Fortescue's definition of law (also found in Accursius and Bracton), after all, was 'a sacred sanction commanding what is virtuous [honesta] and forbidding the contrary.'" Fortescue cited the great Italian Leonardo Bruni for his statement that "virtue alone produces happiness."

Christopher St. Germain's The Doctor and Student was a classic of English jurisprudence, and it was thoroughly annotated by Thomas Jefferson. St. Germain informs his readers that English lawyers generally don't use the phrase "law of nature", but rather use "reason" as the preferred synonym. Norman Doe notes that St. Germain's view "is essentially Thomist," quoting Thomas Aquinas's definition of law as "an ordinance of reason made for the common good by him who has charge of the community, and promulgated".

Sir Edward Coke was the preeminent jurist of his time. Coke's preeminence extended across the ocean: "For the American revolutionary leaders, 'law' meant Sir Edward Coke's custom and right reason." Coke defined law as "perfect reason, which commands those things that are proper and necessary and which prohibits contrary things". For Coke, human nature determined the purpose of law; and law was superior to any one person's reason or will. Coke's discussion of natural law appears in his report of Calvin's Case (1608): "The law of nature is that which God at the time of creation of the nature of man infused into his heart, for his preservation and direction." In this case the judges found that "the ligeance or faith of the subject is due unto the King by the law of nature: secondly, that the law of nature is part of the law of England: thirdly, that the law of nature was before any judicial or municipal law: fourthly, that the law of nature is immutable." To support these findings, the assembled judges (as reported by Coke, who was one of them) cited as authorities Aristotle, Cicero, and the Apostle Paul; as well as Bracton, Fortescue, and St. Germain.

After Coke, the most famous common law jurist of the seventeenth century is Sir Matthew Hale. Hale wrote a treatise on natural law that circulated among English lawyers in the eighteenth century and survives in three manuscript copies. This natural-law treatise has been published as Of the Law of Nature (2015). Hale's definition of the natural law reads: "It is the Law of Almighty God given by him to Man with his Nature discovering the morall good and moral evill of Moral Actions, commanding the former, and forbidding the latter by the secret voice or dictate of his implanted nature, his reason, and his concience." He viewed natural law as antecedent, preparatory, and subsequent to civil government, and stated that human law "cannot forbid what the Law of Nature injoins, nor Command what the Law of Nature prohibits." He cited as authorities Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Seneca, Epictetus, and the Apostle Paul. He was critical of Hobbes's reduction of natural law to self-preservation and Hobbes's account of the state of nature, but drew positively on Hugo Grotius's De jure belli ac pacis, Francisco Suárez's Tractatus de legibus ac deo legislatore, and John Selden's De jure naturali et gentium juxta disciplinam Ebraeorum.

As early as the thirteenth century, it was held that "the law of nature...is the ground of all laws" and by the Chancellor and Judges that "it is required by the law of nature that every person, before he can be punish'd, ought to be present; and if absent by contumacy, he ought to be summoned and make default". Further, in 1824, we find it held that "proceedings in our Courts are founded upon the law of England, and that law is again founded upon the law of nature and the revealed law of God. If the right sought to be enforced is inconsistent with either of these, the English municipal courts cannot recognize it."

Hobbes

Thomas Hobbes

By the 17th century, the medieval teleological view came under intense criticism from some quarters. Thomas Hobbes instead founded a contractarian theory of legal positivism on what all men could agree upon: what they sought (happiness) was subject to contention, but a broad consensus could form around what they feared (violent death at the hands of another). The natural law was how a rational human being, seeking to survive and prosper, would act. Natural law, therefore, was discovered by considering humankind's natural rights, whereas previously it could be said that natural rights were discovered by considering the natural law. In Hobbes' opinion, the only way natural law could prevail was for men to submit to the commands of the sovereign. Because the ultimate source of law now comes from the sovereign, and the sovereign's decisions need not be grounded in morality, legal positivism is born. Jeremy Bentham's modifications on legal positivism further developed the theory.

As used by Thomas Hobbes in his treatises Leviathan and De Cive, natural law is "a precept, or general rule, found out by reason, by which a man is forbidden to do that which is destructive of his life, or takes away the means of preserving the same; and to omit that by which he thinks it may best be preserved."

According to Hobbes, there are nineteen Laws. The first two are expounded in chapter XIV of Leviathan ("of the first and second natural laws; and of contracts"); the others in chapter XV ("of other laws of nature").

  • The first law of nature is that every man ought to endeavour peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it; and when he cannot obtain it, that he may seek and use all helps and advantages of war.
  • The second law of nature is that a man be willing, when others are so too, as far forth, as for peace, and defence of himself he shall think it necessary, to lay down this right to all things; and be contented with so much liberty against other men, as he would allow other men against himself.
  • The third law is that men perform their covenants made. In this law of nature consisteth the fountain and original of justice... when a covenant is made, then to break it is unjust and the definition of injustice is no other than the not performance of covenant. And whatsoever is not unjust is just.
  • The fourth law is that a man which receiveth benefit from another of mere grace, endeavour that he which giveth it, have no reasonable cause to repent him of his good will. Breach of this law is called ingratitude.
  • The fifth law is complaisance: that every man strive to accommodate himself to the rest. The observers of this law may be called sociable; the contrary, stubborn, insociable, forward, intractable.
  • The sixth law is that upon caution of the future time, a man ought to pardon the offences past of them that repenting, desire it.
  • The seventh law is that in revenges, men look not at the greatness of the evil past, but the greatness of the good to follow.
  • The eighth law is that no man by deed, word, countenance, or gesture, declare hatred or contempt of another. The breach of which law is commonly called contumely.
  • The ninth law is that every man acknowledge another for his equal by nature. The breach of this precept is pride.
  • The tenth law is that at the entrance into the conditions of peace, no man require to reserve to himself any right, which he is not content should be reserved to every one of the rest. The breach of this precept is arrogance, and observers of the precept are called modest.
  • The eleventh law is that if a man be trusted to judge between man and man, that he deal equally between them.
  • The twelfth law is that such things as cannot be divided, be enjoyed in common, if it can be; and if the quantity of the thing permit, without stint; otherwise proportionably to the number of them that have right.
  • The thirteenth law is the entire right, or else...the first possession (in the case of alternating use), of a thing that can neither be divided nor enjoyed in common should be determined by lottery.
  • The fourteenth law is that those things which cannot be enjoyed in common, nor divided, ought to be adjudged to the first possessor; and in some cases to the first born, as acquired by lot.
  • The fifteenth law is that all men that mediate peace be allowed safe conduct.
  • The sixteenth law is that they that are at controversie, submit their Right to the judgement of an Arbitrator.
  • The seventeenth law is that no man is a fit Arbitrator in his own cause.
  • The eighteenth law is that no man should serve as a judge in a case if greater profit, or honour, or pleasure apparently ariseth [for him] out of the victory of one party, than of the other.
  • The nineteenth law is that in a disagreement of fact, the judge should not give more weight to the testimony of one party than another, and absent other evidence, should give credit to the testimony of other witnesses.

Hobbes's philosophy includes a frontal assault on the founding principles of the earlier natural legal tradition, disregarding the traditional association of virtue with happiness, and likewise re-defining "law" to remove any notion of the promotion of the common good. Hobbes has no use for Aristotle's association of nature with human perfection, inverting Aristotle's use of the word "nature." Hobbes posits a primitive, unconnected state of nature in which men, having a "natural proclivity...to hurt each other" also have "a Right to every thing, even to one anothers body"; and "nothing can be Unjust" in this "warre of every man against every man" in which human life is "solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short." Rejecting Cicero's view that people join in society primarily through "a certain social spirit which nature has implanted in man", Hobbes declares that men join in society simply for the purpose of "getting themselves out from that miserable condition of Warre, which is necessarily consequent...to the naturall Passions of men, when there is no visible Power to keep them in awe." As part of his campaign against the classical idea of natural human sociability, Hobbes inverts that fundamental natural legal maxim, the Golden Rule. Hobbes's version is "Do not that to another, which thou wouldst not have done to thy selfe."

Cumberland's rebuttal of Hobbes

The English cleric Richard Cumberland wrote a lengthy and influential attack on Hobbes's depiction of individual self-interest as the essential feature of human motivation. Historian Knud Haakonssen has noted that in the eighteenth century, Cumberland was commonly placed alongside Alberico Gentili, Hugo Grotius and Samuel Pufendorf "in the triumvirate of seventeenth-century founders of the 'modern' school of natural law". The eighteenth-century philosophers Shaftesbury and Hutcheson "were obviously inspired in part by Cumberland". Historian Jon Parkin likewise describes Cumberland's work as "one of the most important works of ethical and political theory of the seventeenth century". Parkin observes that much of Cumberland's material "is derived from Roman Stoicism, particularly from the work of Cicero, as "Cumberland deliberately cast his engagement with Hobbes in the mould of Cicero's debate between the Stoics, who believed that nature could provide an objective morality, and Epicureans, who argued that morality was human, conventional and self-interested." In doing so, Cumberland de-emphasized the overlay of Christian dogma (in particular, the doctrine of "original sin" and the corresponding presumption that humans are incapable of "perfecting" themselves without divine intervention) that had accreted to natural law in the Middle Ages.

By way of contrast to Hobbes's multiplicity of laws, Cumberland states in the very first sentence of his Treatise of the Laws of Nature that "all the Laws of Nature are reduc'd to that one, of Benevolence toward all Rationals." He later clarifies: "By the name Rationals I beg leave to understand, as well God as Man; and I do it upon the Authority of Cicero." Cumberland argues that the mature development ("perfection") of human nature involves the individual human willing and acting for the common good. For Cumberland, human interdependence precludes Hobbes's natural right of each individual to wage war against all the rest for personal survival. However, Haakonssen warns against reading Cumberland as a proponent of "enlightened self-interest." Rather, the "proper moral love of humanity" is "a disinterested love of God through love of humanity in ourselves as well as others." Cumberland concludes that actions "principally conducive to our Happiness" are those that promote "the Honour and Glory of God" and also "Charity and Justice towards men." Cumberland emphasizes that desiring the well-being of our fellow humans is essential to the "pursuit of our own Happiness." He cites "reason" as the authority for his conclusion that happiness consists in "the most extensive Benevolence," but he also mentions as "Essential Ingredients of Happiness" the "Benevolent Affections," meaning "Love and Benevolence towards others," as well as "that Joy, which arises from their Happiness."

American jurisprudence

The U.S. Declaration of Independence states that it has become necessary for the people of the United States to assume "the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them". Some early American lawyers and judges perceived natural law as too tenuous, amorphous, and evanescent a legal basis for grounding concrete rights and governmental limitations. Natural law did, however, serve as authority for legal claims and rights in some judicial decisions, legislative acts, and legal pronouncements. Robert Lowry Clinton argues that the U.S. Constitution rests on a common law foundation and the common law, in turn, rests on a classical natural law foundation.

European liberal natural law

Dr Alberico Gentili, the founder of the science of international law.

Liberal natural law grew out of the medieval Christian natural law theories and out of Hobbes' revision of natural law, sometimes in an uneasy balance of the two.

Sir Alberico Gentili and Hugo Grotius based their philosophies of international law on natural law. In particular, Grotius's writings on freedom of the seas and just war theory directly appealed to natural law. About natural law itself, he wrote that "even the will of an omnipotent being cannot change or abrogate" natural law, which "would maintain its objective validity even if we should assume the impossible, that there is no God or that he does not care for human affairs." (De iure belli ac pacis, Prolegomeni XI). This is the famous argument etiamsi daremus (non esse Deum), that made natural law no longer dependent on theology. However, German church-historians Ernst Wolf and M. Elze disagreed and claimed that Grotius' concept of natural law did have a theological basis. In Grotius' view, the Old Testament contained moral precepts (e.g. the Decalogue) which Christ confirmed and therefore were still valid. Moreover, they were useful in explaining the content of natural law. Both biblical revelation and natural law originated in God and could therefore not contradict each other.

In a similar way, Samuel Pufendorf gave natural law a theological foundation and applied it to his concepts of government and international law.

John Locke incorporated natural law into many of his theories and philosophy, especially in Two Treatises of Government. There is considerable debate about whether his conception of natural law was more akin to that of Aquinas (filtered through Richard Hooker) or Hobbes' radical reinterpretation, though the effect of Locke's understanding is usually phrased in terms of a revision of Hobbes upon Hobbesian contractarian grounds. Locke turned Hobbes' prescription around, saying that if the ruler went against natural law and failed to protect "life, liberty, and property," people could justifiably overthrow the existing state and create a new one.

While Locke spoke in the language of natural law, the content of this law was by and large protective of natural rights, and it was this language that later liberal thinkers preferred. Political philosopher Jeremy Waldron has pointed out that Locke's political thought was based on "a particular set of Protestant Christian assumptions." To Locke, the content of natural law was identical with biblical ethics as laid down especially in the Decalogue, Christ's teaching and exemplary life, and St. Paul's admonitions. Locke derived the concept of basic human equality, including the equality of the sexes ("Adam and Eve"), from Genesis 1, 26–28, the starting-point of the theological doctrine of Imago Dei. One of the consequences is that as all humans are created equally free, governments need the consent of the governed. Thomas Jefferson, arguably echoing Locke, appealed to unalienable rights in the Declaration of Independence, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." The Lockean idea that governments need the consent of the governed was also fundamental to the Declaration of Independence, as the American Revolutionaries used it as justification for their separation from the British crown.

The Belgian philosopher of law Frank van Dun is one among those who are elaborating a secular conception of natural law in the liberal tradition. Libertarian theorist Murray Rothbard argues 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 of the State apparatus." Ludwig von Mises states that he relaid the general sociological and economic foundations of the liberal doctrine upon utilitarianism, rather than natural law, but R. A. Gonce argues that "the reality of the argument constituting his system overwhelms his denial." Murray Rothbard, however, says that Gonce makes a lot of errors and distortions in the analysis of Mises's works, including making confusions about the term which Mises uses to refer to scientific laws, "laws of nature", saying it characterizes Mises as a natural law philosopher. David Gordon notes, "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)."

Economist and philosopher F. A. Hayek said that, originally, "the term 'natural' was used to describe an orderliness or regularity that was not the product of deliberate human will. Together with 'organism' it was one of the two terms generally understood to refer to the spontaneously grown in contrast to the invented or designed. Its use in this sense had been inherited from the stoic philosophy, had been revived in the twelfth century, and it was finally under its flag that the late Spanish Schoolmen developed the foundations of the genesis and functioning of spontaneously formed social institutions." The idea that 'natural' was "the product of designing reason" is a product of a seventeenth century rationalist reinterpretation of the law of nature. Luis Molina, for example, when referred to the 'natural' price, explained that it is "so called because 'it results from the thing itself without regard to laws and decrees, but is dependent on many circumstances which alter it, such as the sentiments of men, their estimation of different uses, often even in consequence of whims and pleasures". And even John Locke, when talking about the foundations of natural law and explaining what he thought when citing "reason", said: "By reason, however, I do not think is meant here that faculty of the understanding which forms traint of thought and deduces proofs, but certain definite principles of action from which spring all virtues and whatever is necessary for the proper moulding of morals."

This anti-rationalist approach to human affairs, for Hayek, was the same which guided Scottish enlightenment thinkers, such as Adam Smith, David Hume and Adam Ferguson, to make their case for liberty. For them, no one can have the knowledge necessary to plan society, and this "natural" or "spontaneous" order of society shows how it can efficiently "plan" bottom-up. Also, the idea that law is just a product of deliberate design, denied by natural law and linked to legal positivism, can easily generate totalitarianism: "If law is wholly the product of deliberate design, whatever the designer decrees to be law is just by definition and unjust law becomes a contradiction in terms. The will of the duly authorized legislator is then wholly unfettered and guided solely by his concrete interests". This idea is wrong because law cannot be just a product of "reason": "no system of articulated law can be applied except within a framework of generally recognized but often unarticulated rules of justice".

However, a secular critique of the natural law doctrine was stated by Pierre Charron in his De la sagesse (1601): "The sign of a natural law must be the universal respect in which it is held, for if there was anything that nature had truly commanded us to do, we would undoubtedly obey it universally: not only would every nation respect it, but every individual. Instead there is nothing in the world that is not subject to contradiction and dispute, nothing that is not rejected, not just by one nation, but by many; equally, there is nothing that is strange and (in the opinion of many) unnatural that is not approved in many countries, and authorized by their customs."

Contemporary jurisprudence

One modern articulation of the concept of natural laws was given by Belina and Dzudzek:

In jurisprudence, natural law can refer to the several doctrines:

  • That just laws are immanent in nature; that is, they can be "discovered" or "found" but not "created" by such things as a bill of rights;
  • That they can emerge by the natural process of resolving conflicts, as embodied by the evolutionary process of the common law; or
  • That the meaning of law is such that its content cannot be determined except by reference to moral principles. These meanings can either oppose or complement each other, although they share the common trait that they rely on inherence as opposed to design in finding just laws.

Whereas legal positivism would say that a law can be unjust without it being any less a law, a natural law jurisprudence would say that there is something legally deficient about an unjust norm.

Besides utilitarianism and Kantianism, natural law jurisprudence has in common with virtue ethics that it is a live option for a first principles ethics theory in analytic philosophy.

The concept of natural law was very important in the development of the English common law. In the struggles between Parliament and the monarch, Parliament often made reference to the Fundamental Laws of England, which were at times said to embody natural law principles since time immemorial and set limits on the power of the monarchy. According to William Blackstone, however, natural law might be useful in determining the content of the common law and in deciding cases of equity, but was not itself identical with the laws of England. Nonetheless, the implication of natural law in the common law tradition has meant that the great opponents of natural law and advocates of legal positivism, like Jeremy Bentham, have also been staunch critics of the common law.

Natural law jurisprudence is currently undergoing a period of reformulation (as is legal positivism). The most prominent contemporary natural law jurist, Australian John Finnis, is based in Oxford, but there are also Americans Germain Grisez, Robert P. George, and Canadian Joseph Boyle and Brazilian Emídio Brasileiro. All have tried to construct a new version of natural law. The 19th-century anarchist and legal theorist, Lysander Spooner, was also a figure in the expression of modern natural law.

"New Natural Law" as it is sometimes called, originated with Grisez. It focuses on "basic human goods", such as human life, knowledge, and aesthetic experience, which are self-evidently and intrinsically worthwhile, and states that these goods reveal themselves as being incommensurable with one another.

The tensions between natural law and positive law have played, and continue to play, a key role in the development of international law.

See also

.mw-parser-output .div-col{margin-top:.3em;column-width:30em}.mw-parser-output .div-col-small{font-size:90%}.mw-parser-output .div-col-rules{column-rule:1px solid #aaa}.mw-parser-output .div-col dl,.mw-parser-output .div-col ol,.mw-parser-output .div-col ul{margin-top:0}.mw-parser-output .div-col dd,.mw-parser-output .div-col li{page-break-inside:avoid;break-inside:avoid-column}

References

.mw-parser-output .refbegin{font-size:90%;margin-bottom:.5em}.mw-parser-output .refbegin-hanging-indents>ul{margin-left:0}.mw-parser-output .refbegin-hanging-indents>ul>li{margin-left:0;padding-left:3.2em;text-indent:-3.2em}.mw-parser-output .refbegin-hanging-indents ul,.mw-parser-output .refbegin-hanging-indents ul li{list-style:none}@media(max-width:720px){.mw-parser-output .refbegin-hanging-indents>ul>li{padding-left:1.6em;text-indent:-1.6em}}.mw-parser-output .refbegin-100{font-size:100%}.mw-parser-output .refbegin-columns{margin-top:.3em}.mw-parser-output .refbegin-columns dl,.mw-parser-output .refbegin-columns ol,.mw-parser-output .refbegin-columns ul{margin-top:0}.mw-parser-output .refbegin-columns dd,.mw-parser-output .refbegin-columns li{page-break-inside:avoid;break-inside:avoid-column}

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Natural_law&oldid=999574739"

Uses material from the Wikipedia article Natural law, released under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license.

저작자표시 비영리 변경금지