Content deleted Content added
→Liberal natural law: more info |
m →Liberal natural law: didn't mean to split these up |
||
Line 127:
While Locke spoke in the language of natural law, the content of this law was by and large protective of [[Natural and legal rights|natural rights]], and it was this language that later liberal thinkers preferred. [[Thomas Jefferson]], arguably echoing Locke, appealed to [[inalienable rights|unalienable rights]] in the ''[[United States Declaration of Independence|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."<ref>Pangle, ''The Spirit of Modern Republicanism'' (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988), 209.</ref>
The Belgian philosopher of law [[Frank van Dun]] is one among those who are elaborating a secular conception [http://users.ugent.be/~frvandun/Texts/Logica/NaturalLaw.htm] 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."<ref>{{cite book|title=The Ethics of Liberty|url=http://mises.org/rothbard/ethics.pdf|chapter=Natural Law Versus Positive Law|pages=17|author=Rothbard, Murray}}</ref> [[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."<ref>{{cite journal|title=Natural Law and Ludwig von Mises' Praxeology and Economic Science|author=R. A. Gonce|publisher=Southern Economic Journal|volume=39|number=4|date=Apr., 1973|pages=490-507|publisher=Southern Economic Association|url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/1056701}}</ref> [[David Gordon (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)."<ref>{{citation|author=Gordon, David|title=Review of In Defense of Natural Law by Robert George|url=http://mises.org/misesreview_detail.aspx?control=129|publisher=Ludwig von Mises Institute}}</ref>
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."
| |||