The natural law

The idea of the natural law familiar throughout the Occident and all Christian lands has come down to us from ancient times through the medieval period and the enlightenment and into our own day.

It is the idea of an objective moral law not made in any way by humans, God, the gods, or anyone at all but discoverable to humans that prescribes rights and duties, establishes natural justice, and proscribes crimes.

Fundamental to this whole line of thought is this:

A.      What does not comport with the moral (natural) law is wrong.

And likewise:

B.      What conflicts with a moral (natural) right is wrong.

And:

C.      What conflicts with natural justice is wrong.

Now, as explained in earlier posts, these moral claims A, B, and C, like any others, are not true. But neither are they false. They are, in fact, simply meaningless.

All the same, that does not settle the question whether there is such a thing as the natural law, or whether there are such things as natural rights.

The meaninglessness of A thru C no more entails the non-existence of the natural law or natural rights or natural justice or the moral law than the meaninglessness of the following entails the non-existence of US federal law.

D.      It is wrong to disobey US federal law.

On the other hand, without the truth of A thru C the question of the existence of such things reduces to that of the existence of certain species of abstract entities in the same sort of ontological boat as properties, propositions, sets, numbers, and so on.

So understood, however, the question of the existence of these things is of speculative interest, only, and without practical bearing.

On the other hand, it is sometimes claimed that the natural law, the moral law, natural rights, and natural justice are such that the following is necessarily true.

E.       What conflicts with natural law, the moral law, natural rights, or natural justice is morally wrong.

That is, if such things exist then E is true.

But E is not true, being meaningless.

So, on that understanding, there are no such things as the natural law, the moral law, natural justice, or natural rights.

As an aside I point out that though some authors claim “right,” “wrong,” “permissible,” “impermissible,” and the like in their moral use denote queer properties that do not exist that notion is itself mistaken.

The truth is that they do not denote anything, though it is fundamental to the moral delusion that they do.