Susan Aquinas's Theory Of The Natural Law Theory

992 Words4 Pages
INTRODUCTION The term ‘Natural Law Theories’ can be defined as the rules, concepts, and principles which are said to be originated from some supreme source other than any political or worldly authority. This theory is based on moral ideals which has universal applicability, and often used to bring certain changes in the society or to maintain stability. Natural Law is supreme and unalterable, it is not made by man; Natural Law is not a codified law and hence no penalty is been sanctioned for disobeying it; still it is considered as a higher form of law. Natural Law is also known as the Law of Reason, as being established on the ground of reasonability by which the world is governed, and also as being addressed to and perceived by the rational…show more content…
Aquinas in his works define four kinds of law: (a) eternal law; (b) natural law; (c) human law; and (d) divine law. Eternal law can be defined as principles that govern the nature of an eternal universe; as Susan Dimock (1999, 22) defined one can "think of eternal law as comprising all those scientific (physical, chemical, biological, psychological, etc.) 'laws ' by which the universe is ordered. Divine law focuses on those conditions that must be satisfied by a human being to achieve eternal salvation. Divine law cannot be attained alone by the means of natural reason alone; the precepts of divine law are disclosed only through divine revelation. Natural law includes possession of reason and free will, and should differentiate between good and avoid evil and appreciated the theory of natural law of morality. On his view, a human law (that is, that which is promulgated by human beings) is considered valid only insofar as its content conforms to the content of the natural law; as Aquinas puts the point: "Every human law has just so much of the nature of law as is derived from the law of nature. But if in any point it deflects from the law of nature, it is no longer a law but a perversion of law". To paraphrase…show more content…
MODERN NATURAL PHILOSPHERS 1) Lon .N. Fuller: He was a great legal philosopher, who criticized legal positivism and appreciated a secular and procedural form of natural law theory. He does not said that the principles of the legal system should adhere to the rules of morality or such any other standard. According to him morality can be broadly classified into A) Substantive morality (ii) procedural morality. He believes that law is essentially subject to a procedural morality. On Fuller 's view, human activity is driven to achieve goal or is purposive in the sense that people engage themselves in a particular activity because it helps them to achieve some desired goals. Insofar as human activity is essentially purposive, according to Fuller, particular human activities can only be understood in terms that make sense to their purposes and desired goals. Thus, since law system is essentially driven in such a way to achieve a purpose, it can be understood only in terms that explicitly acknowledge its essential values and
Open Document