The Theories Of The Natural Law Theory

The Theories Of The Natural Law Theory
According to Jenkins, "The natural law theory begins with theories about the nature and purpose of the world and moves on to ask about the
purpose of every action or object. The right thing to do is that which fulfils the natural purpose." Natural law was developed by Thomas Aquinas,
in which he believed that there is such a thing as natural moral law. Natural law ethics depends on the belief that the world was designed by a
creator, God. It teaches everything God made has a purpose, including every aspect of human life, and everything should work towards the purpose
assigned to it. If we fulfil this purpose we do 'good', for example it is good to preserve life ("Do not kill"). If we frustrate the purpose for which
something has been...show more content...
Human nature is generally good and therefore if we do wrong it is because we are in pursuit of an apparent good, e.g. abortion, can seem like at a
good thing at times. According to Vardy and Grosch, "Humans seek apparent good, but this is not true good; only apparent good because it does not
conform to the perfection of human nature which all humans share." A historical example would be that of Hitler and Stalin, who did not seek out evil
but sought what they thought, was right. The theory of natural law states that you are only responsible for the immediate consequences of your actions
– not for the secondary or unintended effects of your action. This adds flexibility to the theory of natural law in such areas as just war and etopic
pregnancy. According to Thompson, "Natural law is based on nature as seen by human reason enlightened by Christian faith. In the light of Jesus'
teaching and belief in God, reason can decide, by looking at nature, what is right." Natural law however has some faults. It depends on the belief that
the world was designed by a creator. Aquinas assumes that all men must seek to worship God, atheists not taken into consideration. According to
Thompson, "...if someone does not believe in God, then the natural law theory loses its foundation." The theory also suggests that reproduction is one
of God's natural purposes of creating humankind, not considering those who are biologically
Get more content on HelpWriting.net

John Locke And The Law Of Nature
. John Locke's notion of the Law of Nature is crucial and necessary to understand his work the 'Second Treatise of Government'. His beliefs in limited
government and individual rights are perceived throughout the entire text, but in order to understand why he believes this it is necessary to understand
and analyze three elements. First one must understand what the Law of Nature is according to John Locke and why it is an essential element towards all
individuals. Second one must understand how the Law of Nature interacts with the State of Nature. Third and last how the Law of Nature should
be upheld in political society and the problem that arises when political society is in conflict with it. According to John Locke all individuals are
found in a State of Nature, a basic state where all individuals are found regardless of where they fall culturally, geographically, and religiously. In
the State of Nature all human beings are the same and share certain characteristics. Because this state is shared among all human beings there are
certain laws or rules that apply to all individuals in the State of Nature; this is the Law of Nature and according to Locke it is what governs the State
of Nature. Besides governing the State of Nature, the Law of Nature allows others to realize that every human being should be equal and independent
and due to this it is necessary to respect everyone's life, property, health and liberty (Locke, Second Treatise of Government 9). The Law of

Reflection Paper On Law Of Nature
Reflection paper questions–Locke
There is a need to understand the law of nature because law of nature is a perfect law of equality, peace, no superiority of one person over another
and absolute freedom for everyone. Nature provides human beings with a law by which everyone is equal, everyone got equal freedom, equal
rights, and no one can dominate other by using the claims of jurisdiction or autonomy. It is very important to understand the law of nature because it
provides a perfect example of how a peaceful and orderly world should. In a peaceful and orderly world, there is no violation of law, if someone breaks
the law he/she will be punished equally and in this way, every human being will enjoy maximized freedom.
In the law of nature there is only one supreme power who is controlling nature and every living thing on nature will follow the set rules of harmony,
peace and cooperation. They all shouldstay in the natural law to progress and in that way, not only nature will be preserved but human beings can
also live in harmony. The concept is important because political power is a concept that is invented to run the states and communities in orderly
manner and to provide freedom, equality and justice to everyone. A perfect political power will be that power that ensures law of nature is to be
followed in any case and thus to understand political power, one must learn the basics of law of nature. All people are equal in the state of nature
because there is only one supreme being and all human beings are equal with equal rights to prosper and live. There are no issues of jurisdiction or
supremacy of one person over another because law of nature has provided every human being with equal opportunities.
According to Locke the main reason we cannot harm each other is that because all human beings are created equals thus no one is superior as
compare to other and if we will harm another equal being we are challenging the authority of sovereign creator who gave freedom to everyone but we
are enjoying our freedom but snatching others. He gave the example of like we use animals, because human beings use animals against their will, they
use them for money and profits and do not care about their rights or freedom

Locke 's Theory Of Equality And Natural Law
Locke's theory of equality and natural law. What is equality? Equality is the state of being equal and the rights of status. Throughout the 1st and 2nd
treatise of government Locke put emphasis on equality. Locke is a liberalist who believes that everyone should have equality in a governed society.
The reason Locke feels that way is because in a society the people create the government. With the citizens doing this they give the government consent
to govern them by protecting them and their property. By them giving this it means that everyone has equal rights. Locke's view of equality wasn't
limited to the politics he expanded to religion which has equality as well. The idea of equality came from the state of nature which transition into...show
more content...
This is the only time we have the liberty to destroy creatures we do not possess power over. Locke talks about the law of nature in the state of nature.
"law teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty and,
possessions." In this quote Locke is saying that the natural law instills what's right and wrong. The fact that we are all equal and independent, no one
should harm each other because of the fact that everyone in the society is on an equal level playing field.
As you keep reading Locke starts talking about the creator. Locke said, "For men being all workmanship of one omnipotent and indefinitely wise
Maker..." Omnipotent means all–powerful or almighty. The omnipotent one is God, he is our creator we are Gods workmanship.
He states, "All servants of one sovereign master, sent into the world by his order to do his business" I feel Locke is saying that we are all children of
God and that we were sent into the world to do good works in his name. Example of doing good works would be spreading the Gods name all over the
world. Locke said that, "they are his property, whose workmanship they are, made to last during his, not another's pleasure." I feel that Locke was
saying that since God almighty made us we are his property basically he has soil possession over us. And God made us to be durable and live
prosperous lives. Example

First Three Laws Of Nature By Thomas Hobbes
The first three laws of nature according to Thomas Hobbes were a way to put an end to the state of war. These laws are based on the idea of a social
contract between two human beings that involves mutual rights between parties. In this answer I will describe how these laws can bring about peace in
society.
Since all of these laws are brought together through peace, according to Hobbes the first law deals with seeking out peace where war is not an
option. Hobbes believes that in order for man to preserve life he must seek out peace and if peace is achieved this will prevent us from the state of
war. In today's society our goal is to advance the global peace system by supporting and collaborating with peacebuilding efforts.
The second law of nature deals with the surrendering of our natural rights in order to achieve peace that we are seeking. If a person does not give up
their natural right, they are considered a threat to the existence of peace among a...show more content...
This law is the foundation for human justice but because of the human desire for power, there is always an incentive to break this contract despite the
logic of the third law and the natural mandate to preserve our own lives (Hobbes; Leviathan Chapter 14–16). Other natural laws and eventually the
concept of sovereignty must come into play in order to preserve functionality of this third law (Hobbes; Leviathan Chapter 14–16).
According to Hobbes if all individuals follow these three natural laws there is a greater chance of peace in society. In a social contract between
individuals, there is an agreement to give up their natural rights. Hobbes uses this theory to explain the relationship between individuals and others in
society and how they can live free from constant conflict and maintain the peace in

Essay On State Of Nature By Thomas Hobbes
Thomas Hobbes was a philosopher from England whose work and ideas have arguably made him the founder of modern political philosophy. His
most famous work is the Leviathan, which he wrote in 1651. In it he describes his view of human nature and hence his view of government. Hobbes'
view of justice is based on his view of what he names the state of nature and the right of nature. Hobbes defines the state of nature as a "war" of
everyone against everyone. Hobbes describes the right of nature to be self–preservation. Justice, in order to appease both the state of nature and the
right of nature, is then a human construct created out of our drive for self–preservation, at least according to Hobbes. He defines justice as the keeping
of valid or enforced...show more content...
Another way would be to build that idea into the form or system of government. Specifically building a form of government where the
self–preservation of the ruler is dependent on the self–preservation of the people would serve to readily dissuade the rulers from pursuing self–interest.
As of yet, the most effective way this is done is with a republic or a democracy where the government leaders, if not the matters themselves, are chosen
by the voice of the

HUMA 1825 B Akram Saiyed Study Questions & Answers Student Number: 213985858 Attention: Course Director, Neil Braganza Email:
saiakram@yorku.ca November 14th, 2014 Sir William Blackstone All page references are to Blackstone's text 1.What are the characteristics of
"municipal law" according to Blackstone? See 33–34, 39, 40–42 Blackstone commentaries state that there are two charities to municipal law or
Muncipium (pl. municipal); the laws of nature and the...show more content...
Citizens develop this law to satisfy their wants and fears as individuals in the society as citizens live by their common interest but this sense of fear
as holds the society in place together. Municipals law is about formulation, developing tools that have strength in numbers, establishes that all of us
work together. It is then defined how parts obey the whole, so the whole can be possible. Without a superior authoritative, we fall into isolation
because we need the supreme who govern us of 'what is right and forbid what is wrong' or Superior to the inferior, meaning, the whole to the part or
state to the individual, which gives respect of their existence as citizens and the state not about citizen's being a creature of God. The municipal law
must be a general, it must be more than just an advice, and it must not be dependent by will of an individual. Both the willing and the unwilling must
follow the law. It is a human free will. It is not an agreement; it must establish the bases of authority. However, acting and free will differentiate. We
must not act but free–will and opinion to say anything must be allowed. It is therefore, limited and gives us certain rights to community to allow some
possible speech. The law is not something that not found from the state but it applies to everyone. It must be made public and presented to the public
ahead of time and the rules have to come from a supreme

The Law Of Nature : The Laws Of Human Nature
The Laws of Human Nature applies to some kind of standard of behavior which is expected. It is a standard agreement as to what is right and wrong
or "Law of Nature". Other laws of nature include Gravitation, Heredity, and Chemistry. These other laws cannot be changed unlike the Law of Human
Nature. With human nature, we have a choice to disobey. It was called the Law of Human Nature because it was assumed that it was obvious to all.
Some might say that the Law of Human Nature is unsound because of the different civilizations throughout the years, moralities, or different ages. C.S.
Lewis and Kathleen Norris point out that even though they have differences, the differences don't amount to much.
Since we have come to the conclusion within society that there is a "Right and Wrong", Law of Human Nature, we see that more of us cannot
truly keep it. Once we fail we start making excuses as to why we did or didn't do something. We, in fact, do believe in the "Law of Human Nature"
because if we didn't believe in decent behavior why would we try so hard when we fail, to correct it or excuse it. Human beings have a real sense to
behave a certain way which cannot be ignored. Humans are very aware that they do not behave in what is considered "right". Even though we know
the law, we still break it. These facts are primary thinking of ourselves and the world around us.
Some feel that this "Law" is nothing more than our hard instinct which has been developed over time. The difference is

The Laws of Nature
Both Hobbes and Locke come up with their own versions of the laws of nature. A law of nature is a general rule that is come to by reason and
common sense. Unlike a civil law, the laws of nature don't have to be written down. These laws are just put into place by basic human reason. The
laws of nature are thought of when talking about the state of nature. Both Hobbes and Locke discuss the state of nature, but see it in different ways,
resulting in different laws of nature per the two philosophers.
Hobbes sees the state of nature as a horrible place where fear rules every person living inside of it. In his book "Leviathan", he concluded that men
must seek peace to preserve their own life. Because of this Hobbes says that the first law of nature is,...show more content...
This mutual transferring of rights is called a contract and becomes the basis for moral obligation per Hobbes. The third law of nature states that we can
to just make contracts but must hold to every one of our contracts
(Hobbes, 324). This law of nature leads to the foundation of the concept of "justice". Hobbes accounts of the laws of nature affect his overall political
philosophy by making him see the state of nature as an unforgiving place of war and that men should do everything possible to escape it.
He believed that even when under a government that is corrupt and oppressive, would be better that being under no government at all and being in the
state of nature.
In the "Second Treatise of Civil Rights", Locke sees the state of nature as a place of equality, where no one has power over the other and all can do
whatever it is that they want.
However, this liberty still does not give someone the right to do harm on to another (Locke, 365).
He determines from this statement that natural law exist in the state of nature. He says that each person in the state of nature has the power to follow
through with natural laws which are

Essay On Law Of Human Nature
The Law of Human Nature is often forgotten about but is a very important topic because it explains the way that God gave us our own ability to
choose between right and wrong, in other words in the sense of what people actually do, compared to what they should do. There are things in life
that we want to do and there are also things in life that we have to do or need to do and the law of nature will tell us what we need to do.
Sometimes we need to follow our instincts and sometimes we do not. The Law tells us what is right and wrong if we listen to it. Some will argue
saying they don't believe in a real right and wrong. "For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to
themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears
witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ
Jesus." Romans 2:14–16.1 The Benson's Bible Commentary says, "That is, what the law was to the Jews, they are by the light and grace of God to
themselves, namely, a rule of life. All the ancient Greek commentators, as Whitby has shown, interpreted this passage not of the Gentiles who had been
converted to Christianity, but of those Gentiles who had not been favored with a revealed law, and therefore were neither proselytes to Judaism nor
Christianity."2 The Law of

Essay about Thomas Hobbes' Laws of Nature
Thomas Hobbes: What Is The Difference Between Obligations In foro interno and In foro externo, and When Do We Have Such Obligations?
According to Thomas Hobbes, there are certain laws of nature which exist in the absence of an organized government. These laws are extremely cut
throat, and place people in extremely dangerous situations where their lives are in danger. Government is the answer to this dangerous situation, but it
is here that the question of obligation comes into question. Does one have an obligation to take a chance and follow the laws set forth for them, or
should they only think of themselves, and follow the laws of nature? This is a vital question which I will explore.
According to Hobbes, the overriding law of nature...show more content...
The difference between there two are that in foro interno means inside you, or you believing in something. In this case, it would mean that inside
you, you would want to strive for peace because it would mean an end to worrying about your life. No longer would you have to walk around in a
state of nature where any one can come and take your life. Hobbes believed that a person always has an obligation to strive towards peace in foro
interno because every man wants one thing more than any other, and that is to live.
However, Hobbes did not believe that you always had an obligation to work towards peace in foro externo. The reason for this, simply put, you can
not trust other men to do the same unless you can be sure that they will not turn on you and take your life. Hobbes felt that, "For he that
should be modest and tractable, and preform all he promises, in such time and place where no man else should do, should be make himself prey to
others, and procure his own certain ruin, contrary to the ground of all laws of nature, which tend to nature's preservation."3 Hobbes felt that
one's obligation in foro externo ended when fulfilling the obligation would endanger the life of the person. Every law of nature is geared for the
preservation of the life of the self, and therefore, every man has the right to not do something should it mean that he would have to give up his or her
life. In the case of in foro

The Fundamental Law Of Nature And Government
In this essay I will be arguing that the prerogative is a right that is needed by the executive branch in order to fulfill the fundamental law of nature
and government: the preservation of all of its members. So long as the fiduciary grant is meant to achieve this goal it has the right to be exercised at
the discretion of its user. This argument will discuss the nature of the prerogative, its necessity, and its justification for use. This will be supported with
evidence from Locke's Second Treatise of Government. The prerogative is not an abusive instrument that is meant to subverts the laws society; it is a
tool meant to adhere with utmost urgency to the fundamental law of society: doing what is best for the people and their property. It is meant to ensure
that not even its own laws can do harm to the citizens it so righteously protects. The enshrinement of this ideal is founded on the social contract all
members of civil society enter into when they become a part of society. This contract is created from something as well; the law that governed man
in its original state of nature, reason. Locke asserts that man was born into the world in a perfect state of freedom to order his own actions. He is
capable of reciprocal jurisdiction without consent from any outside influence. Abiding by the law of nature he came to find that all men were
independent and equal by divine will. Since God had created all men they would be his property, and thus all would be held in the same

Argument For The Existence Of A Law Of Nature
In C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity, Lewis bases the majority of his argument for Christianity on the existence of a Law of Nature, or Moral Law. He
argues that this is the source of the moral compass common to all of mankind and proves the existence of the Christian God. Lewis stresses the
importance of this concept to explain the validity of Christian doctrine. This paper will analyze Lewis' argument for the existence of a Law of Nature
in Mere Christianity as well as "Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis" by Adam Lee, a refute of that argument. C.S. Lewis argues that a common Moral
Law created by an external power links all of mankind, that this Law is not an instinct, and that it is not a social convention. Adam Lee then argues that
this Law...show more content...
He also asserts that selfishness in some form has been disesteemed in all civilizations since the beginning of time (Lewis 6). In his rebuttal to Mere
Christianity, Adam Lee believes this claim is ridiculous. He points out examples such as eugenics, polygamy, and slavery that erode Lewis' argument
(Lee). These seem to easily debunk the core claim of Lewis' argument; Lewis cannot prove that an all–powerful god is behind this Law if it does not
apply to all of mankind. Lee even cites the capitalist system as proof that morality is not objective; capitalism encourages selfishness and greed in the
pursuit of personal gain (Lee). Both men seem to miss an important factor that weighs on human decisions; this factor is evil. The presence of evil in
the world is undeniable, and, in the Christian worldview, it comes in the form of Satan. Morality is objective and universal as Lewis argues, but
Satan's influence can affect the perspective of humans. In the minds of humans, this influence can spawn actions such as those mentioned above by
Lee. Even while under this influence, humans still feel the inevitable pull of the Law of Nature. In summary, Lee had reasonable evidence to refute
Lewis, but he failed to see the true nature of those exceptions. Once his claim is established, Lewis addresses several common counter–claims to his
argument.
By addressing possible rebuttals to his

Thomas Hobbes' concept of natural law is shown in his theory of the state of nature, the pre–state environment, and consists of two laws: individuals
have to pursue a peaceful life, and are allowed to defend their existence by any means possible. This has particular ramifications in the formation of
civil society, especially in terms of loyalty, morality and the relationship between man and the leviathan that is the state. Hobbes' theory has two of
flaws in particular – the logic in his theory of the state of nature, and the relationship he expects mankind to have with the state.
Hobbes' theory of natural law is based on the premise that individuals are atomistic, rational, self–centred, and in a perpetual state of conflict and...show
more content...
The only time one can withdraw consent from the state is when the state loses the capacity to defend its people, because the law of self–preservation
takes precedence to the covenant (both natural laws take precedence over everything else in an individual's life).
It has been asserted that Hobbes' idea that all men are at war and yet seek peace at the same time is contradictory . Hobbes' idea of the way desires
such as hope of escaping the state of nature and fear of one another impact the formation of civil society is incorrect, because he ignores the way these
would more likely encourage a peaceful benevolence in the state of nature than a social contract for self–defence. The same causes he puts forward for
war can also bring about peace , and Hobbes' own theory of reason and the desire for peace would suggest that individuals in the state of nature would
in fact establish benevolent relationships and friendships with one another, which would eventually culminate in a civil society. It would seem, then,
that a joint effort in the pursuit of happiness and the common good will bring about the greatest happiness possible from the state of nature, because
there is otherwise competition and selfishness which can guarantee happiness for a short period at best. A possible argument to this is that the
framework of such a pursuit is vulnerable to misconduct on

What Defines The Law Of Nature? Essay
Julie Barba
Mrs. Yennie
Comp/Lit 4
March 2015
Identity Thieves
What defines the law of nature? Our genetic makeup is what makes us individual from others, an unplanned decision that no one had control over; it
was a decision dictated by nature. This scenario is the concept of the law of nature, something made by nature that cannot be influenced or changed by
man. In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that human DNA cannot be patented but synthetic DNA (cDNA) is patent eligible because it is artificially
made. Human DNA is now strictly off limits, thanks to the court ruling versus Myriad Genetics in June 2013. The court ruling could not have been
made possible without the people who pushed to make the case public, those whose genes were being patented. Breast cancer patients were being
charged an excess amount of money to patent their human DNA which turned out to be an illegal act. Someone having the ability to own another
person 's DNA was not something that was going to be okay. However, there are still blurred lines on gene patenting due to cases such as cDNA
naturally occurring in retroviruses like HIV1. Although synthetic DNA can naturally exist in retroviruses and be patented, genetic laboratories should
not be able to patent all naturally occurring DNA sequences and use them in genetic testing because it violates the law of nature. DNA are the building
blocks of what makes each species unique from the other, which contains the essential information "needed for an organism

John Locke Law Of Nature
The Law of Nature is the universal concept at which most philosophers would refer to when describing the natural state of society and humans (Joseph,
1999). The meaning of the Law of Nature also differs from one philosopher to another. Here, Hobbes describes it as something humans of rational
thinking would try to escape even if it means subjecting oneself to absolute authority (Baumgold, 2010).
The Social Contract has taken up a new meaning under Hobbes. Social Contract has become the means by which Man, defined to be self–interested and
reasonable, escapes the Law of Nature which was described to be intolerable. That Man, is willing to give up his freedom just to lead a civil life which
is more conducive for his self–interests. Locke
John Locke is one of the most influential thinkers of his time. His work, Two Treatises on Government, inspired the founding fathers of the United
States of America and contradicted the prevalent ideas in England (Dienstag, 1996). For Locke, the Law of Nature, contrary to Hobbes, is a state of
perfect and complete liberty to lead one's life as best as one sees it fit; that it should be free from any kind of interference from others (Dienstag,
1996). This is under the belief of Locke that everyone is equally created by God and therefore has equal freedom to pursue his personal interests.
Although, this does not mean that anyone is free to harm and trespass one another. This is for the same reason that only God has the right to take away

Hobbe's Laws of Nature Essay
Based upon the assigned segment of Thomas Hobbes' The Leviathan, I find that it contrasts very strongly with my own perception of humanity and our
motivations. I consider his conclusions to be both ignorant and uninformed (ironic, considering I've only ever read one segment of his works...) at least
in regard to human nature. Hobbes takes the position that in a "state of nature" there are no laws and as such the concept of justice and injustice is null,
because there is no law to violate or enforce. Which, in the most basic, factual and literary sense, is true. But in application, I don't believe that the
theory holds much merit. Hobbes' basis for the state of nature is that in such a state, there is no authority, and without authority,...show more content...
Ignoring the seemingly self–contradicting aspect of Hobbes' theory, then by his own definition, if somebody where to invade for the sake of fighting,
that would be unjust, as it would violate his natural laws. If not injustice, what would Hobbes claim a selfish and violent act such as rape or murder
be? In our society, there exist plenty of people who do not recognize the right of government (theoretically placing them in a state of nature), but out of
either principle or (a concept which I believe Hobbes neglects) sympathy, they do not rape or murder whomever they could gain something from.
Without yet even considering the possibility of justice in the state of nature, Hobbes' views already seem preposterous. With no applied government, if
somebody were, hypothetically, to steal something from another person and an observer were to stop the thief and return the stolen item, then whether
there are laws or not, that –– at least by my definition –– would be considered justice.
Hobbes does however differentiate good and bad from just and unjust. Good being what men desire and bad being what men hate. These definitions
being of childlike in their simplicity are in Hobbes' eyes, applied on a person by person basis. Perhaps the question, in light of Hobbes' views and the
modern understanding of these words should then be rephrased: "Is there good or bad in a state of nature?" Which I think depends on the majorities
feelings. Perhaps the definitions have

The Law Of Human Nature
Emily Moffit
Apologetics
23 July 15
1. The "Law of Human Nature" says that a man can choose to obey or disobey God. An opposite of this would be Lewis 's example of gravity which is
a natural law and we cannot choose to have gravity.
2. They are appealing to some kind of normal behavior and they expect other people to understand.
3. First to give help due to instinct, second to keep out of danger due to self–preservation, thirdly the moral law which will decide for you if you have
two opposite or conflicting decision. Instead of making the safe decision the moral law will help you make the best moral decision.
4. The moral law chooses the best moral decisions to help others, by not acting from instinct and from acting morally.
5. The "Law of Human Nature" is the law we feel most commonly compelled to follow but usually break because it is hard to follow. On the other
hand the Physical laws can not be broken like human nature can be they are set facts.
6. The materialist view is thinking matter and space came about in some random way and have always existed. Materialists also think that matter
created human beings in a weird offset way with chemicals and things coming together.
7. According to the Religious view mind is more behind the universe than most things. Assuming Lewis is referring to God, he says that "it is
conscious and has purpose." He made us like him for a purpose.
8. Some sort of ultimate power creates the universe because the universe cannot create itself

The Natural Law Theory Essay examples
Obeying by the natural law theory is the only true and moral way to live life; especially a life lived in God's image. God's presence is a guiding factor
to obtaining a moral and virtuous life, which can only be obtained by following the natural law theory. God created a set of laws as a supreme guide
for humans to live life, like any law these laws were created to ensure wellbeing for everyone. The laws he created are the civil law, the natural law
and the divine law God created them from a law much superior than the rest, one which only God himself has the knowledge of, the eternal law.
Humans actively participate in the eternal law of God by using reason in conformity with the Natural Law to discern what is good and evil(Magee 1). Of
...show more content...
Whatever is in motion now was at rest until moved by something else, and that by something else, and so on. But if there were an infinite series of
movers, all waiting to be moved by something else, then actual motion could never have got started, and there would be no motion now. But there is
motion now. So there must be a First Mover which is itself unmoved. This First Mover we call God (Archon 1).
The final crucial proof of the existence of God is Aquinas fourth proof. This proof looks at qualities of humans; all humans possess many different
attributes which we consider unique to each individual. This is when standards are formed humans began to have a certain criteria for how or what
someone with a given attribute should act or how they should portray themselves. The only way this standard could come into existence is to believe
that there is a perfect creation possessing all qualities and expressing them in the most precise and perfect way. This perfect creation is God, the
person in which humans get the laws at which the obeyed by. Aquinas five proofs of the existence of God are much more extensive but just looking at
the proof of motion and the proof of perfection it becomes unquestionable that there is an almighty creation. This superior creation creates laws at which

The Theories Of The Natural Law Theory

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to The Theories Of The Natural Law Theory

Similar to The Theories Of The Natural Law Theory (10)

More from Buy A College Paper

More from Buy A College Paper (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The Theories Of The Natural Law Theory