Dr.

SHAKUNTALA MISRA NATIONAL REHABILITATION

UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF LAW

Research Project on

THEORY OF NATURAL LAW

SUBMITTED TO

SHAIL SHAKYA

ASSISTANT PROFFESOR

FACULTY OF LAW

D.S.M.N.R.U.

SUBMITTED BY

SHUBHAM PAL

B.CO.LL.B.(HONS.)

III SEMESTER

1|Page
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction theory of Natural Law 3-5

2. Ethics of Natural Law 6-8

3. Natural rights v. Human rights 9-10

4. Conclusion 11-12

5. Bibliography 13

2|Page
 THEORY OF NATURAL LAW

Introduction

The term "natural law" is ambiguous. It refers to a type of

moral theory, as well as to a type of legal theory, but the core
claims of the two kinds of theory are logically independent. It
does not refer to the laws of nature, the laws that science aims
to describe. According to natural law moral theory, the moral
standards that govern human behavior are, in some sense,
objectively derived from the nature of human beings and the
nature of the world. While being logically independent of
natural law legal theory, the two theories intersect. However,
the majority of the article will focus on natural law legal theory.

According to natural law legal theory, the authority of

legal standards necessarily derives, at least in part, from

3|Page
considerations having to do with the moral merit of those
standards. There are a number of different kinds of natural law
legal theories, differing from each other with respect to the role
that morality plays in determining the authority of legal norms.

The conceptual jurisprudence of John Austin provides a

set of necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of
law that distinguishes law from non-law in every possible
world. Classical natural law theory such as the theory
of Thomas Aquinas focuses on the overlap between natural law
moral and legal theories. Similarly, the neo-naturalism of John
Finnis is a development of classical natural law theory. In
contrast, the procedural naturalism of Lon L. Fuller is a rejection
of the conceptual naturalist idea that there are
necessary substantive moral constraints on the content of law.
Lastly, Ronald Dworkins theory is a response and critique
of legal positivism. All of these theories subscribe to one or
more basic tenets of natural law legal theory and are important

4|Page
to its development and influence.

In other words Natural law is the philosophy that certain

rights, moral values, and responsibilities are inherent in human
nature, and that those rights can be understood through
simple reasoning. In other words, they just make sense when
you consider the nature of humanity. Throughout history, the
phrase natural law has had to do with determining how
humans should behave morally. The law of nature is universal,
meaning that it applies to everyone in the same way. To
explore this concept, consider the following natural law
definition.

5|Page
 Ethics of natural law
The natural law approach to
solving ethical dilemmas begins with the basic belief that
everyone has the right to live their life. From there, natural law
theorists draw a line between an innocent life and the life of an
'unjust aggressor.' The natural law theory recognizes the legal
and moral concept of self-defense, which is often used to justify
acts of war.

Natural law theory is not always a simple school of thought.

It should come as no surprise that the ethics associated with
natural law are equally complicated. The idea that the
definition of what is 'right' and what is 'wrong' is the same for
'every person' is sometimes difficult to apply to complex ethical
dilemmas.
Natural law theory is a label that has been applied to
theories of ethics, theories of politics, theories of civil law, and

6|Page
theories of religious morality. We will be concerned only with
natural law theories of ethics: while such views arguably have
some interesting implications for law, politics, and religious
morality, these implications will not be our focus here.

An early attempt at answering the "Why be Moral?"

challenge to Divine Command Ethics, is the Natural Law theory
of ethics described by Thomas Aquinas. He theorized that the
world is governed by natural laws (divinely given, of course).
And that Man can discover these natural laws, and govern his
life according to them. Aquinas argued that when we focus on
man's role as recipient of the natural law, the natural law
constitutes the principles of practical rationality. It is against
the dictates of the natural law that human action is to be
judged as reasonable or unreasonable. Natural law is the
preeminent part of the theory of practical rationality.
Thomas Hobbes can also be classified as a natural law
theorist. Like Aquinas, Hobbes held that the laws of nature are

7|Page
divine law, that all humans are bound by them, and that it is
easy to know at least the basics of the natural law. Of course, if
one maintains the premise that these Natural Laws have God
as the law giver, then there is little difference between Natural
Law Ethics and Divine Command Ethics. All of the flaws
infecting Divine Command Ethics will also infect Divine Natural
Law Ethics.

8|Page
 NATURAL RIGHTS vs. HUMAN RIGHTS

First of all, natural inalienable rights do not come from

government. Governments only secure these rightsthat is,

they create the political conditions that allow one to exercise

them. Human rights, on the other hand, are bestowed by the

state and have become a catch-all term for anything we desire

and deem important. As a result, whereas natural rights (such

as life, liberty, and property) are rights that government

protects from infringement by others, human rights (such as

housing and leisure) are often things that government is

obligated to provide.

Secondly, natural rights, being natural, do not change over

time. All men, at all times, have the same right to life, liberty,

9|Page
and the pursuit of happiness. Human rights, on the other
hand,

constantly change. A whole cottage industry has sprung up to

advance an array of new economic and social rights

conceived of, defined by, and promoted by government and

international bureaucrats.

10 | P a g e
 CONCLUSION
In the end, where does law come from? The Theory of Natural
Law maintains that certain moral laws transcend time, culture,
and government. There are universal standards that apply to all
mankind throughout all time. These universal moral standards
are inherent in and discoverable by all of us, and form the basis
of a just society.

The fundamental principle of natural law ethics is that good

should be done and evil avoided. This general principle may be
specified into moral axioms like: Do not kill! Be faithful!
Preserve your life! Care for you children! Do not lie or
steal! Life is a universal human good! All of these axioms are

11 | P a g e
both natural and good. We further specify these axioms by
rational analysis and by reliance on Church, scripture, or
revelation. As Aristotle pointed out, natural inclinations and
tendencies are good, and we fulfill them by acquiring the
elements which constitute human happiness such as: life,
procreation, friendship, and knowledge. Nevertheless, within
the boundaries set by human nature, the specific way one
satisfies natural inclinations may differ. So a range of activities
might satisfy, for instance, our aesthetic or intellectual needs.
However, we all need the universal human goods. Thus,
morality demands that we follow the laws of our nature which
are the same for all on the basis of our shared humanity.

12 | P a g e
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Primary Sources
1. Jurisprudence and legal theory-- V.D.MAHAJANs

2. Jurisprudence and legal theory N.V.PARANJAPE

Secondary sources
1. Natural law theory, available at https://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/natural-
law.htm , last seen on 22/10/2017.

2. http://study.com/academy/lesson/natural-law-theory-definition-ethics-examples.html ,

Last seen on 23/10/2017.

13 | P a g e