11

Cicero | Natural Law, Natural Rights, and American Constitutionalism

Posted by XenokRoy 10 years ago to Education
21 comments | Share | Flag

Others may already be aware of this site. I found it while looking for some reading around Natural Law. I had not realized that Cicero had discussions around Natural Law and found this to be an interesting site.

Prior to this I had thought John Locke to be the father of the idea of Natural law. It goes back much further.

Hopefully some other people out there will also find it interesting.
SOURCE URL: http://www.nlnrac.org/classical/cicero


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by Zenphamy 10 years ago
    Xenok, It is indeed interesting. Thanks for posting.
    To myself, it brings to mind many of the discussions and arguments I've had in the past with those that assumed that we, as humans, are so much more evolved than our ancestors. So much of our thinking, rather than being evolved, IMHO results from the technological developments of the time that result in an increase of leisure time and cultural opportunities of the times we live in. In many ways the concepts of men being born equal reflects that we all start from the beginning of thought when we're each born. Men and writings such as Cicero's remind us that human concepts, thinking, and attempts to apply logic have been with us since the beginnings of our race.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by dbhalling 10 years ago
      I doubt logic was from the beginning, but certainly thinking.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Zenphamy 10 years ago
        I would agree with you that 'formal' logic had to develop, but on the other hand I believe that at all times human, some men that seemed naturally better at some efforts or achievements within their respective cultures or groups, were more able than others to apply logical reasoning to the needed efforts of their times. I don't think that all, or even many, of those men had the time or leisure to develop their explanations of how to do those things they achieved, to such a point that others could easily replicate or more generally apply them.

        I wonder as much how so many seem to anesthetize rational thinking in their lives.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ blarman 10 years ago
        If humans are rational beings, why not? Is not the process of thinking rationalizing the value of a certain decision?

        I would argue that sentience itself is predicated on the logical ability to discern identity and value. To argue that one can "think" without logic to me seems absurd. Now if one wants to argue that knowledge at the beginning was not at a premium and therefore the decisions made based on inferior knowledge, one may have an argument there. Then again, if any one of us had perfect knowledge, we would always make perfect decisions. Tell me when someone reaches that lofty plateau, as I'll ask them for a rope to pull me up!
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by dbhalling 10 years ago
    Aquinas here gets close to Rand's argument

    (Aquinas, ST I-II, Q.90, A.I). On this common view, since human beings are by nature rational beings, it is morally appropriate that they should behave in a way that conforms to their rational nature. Thus, Aquinas derives the moral law from the nature of human beings (thus, "natural law"). http://www.iep.utm.edu/natlaw/
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      I have not read Aquinas before, but plan to read his section on this site in the future.

      I find it fascinating to see both the contributions over the years to developing the philosophy and the way in with it becomes more concrete and clear as each philosopher adds and builds on the concepts of Natural Rights.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by dbhalling 10 years ago
        I think it is a mistake to think of natural rights as totally consistent with natural law. For instance, Judge Nap. defines natural law as a natural yearning. His formulation would not be the same as Locke's. I am not sure why he did this, but I think it is an attempt to give it some more christian underpinning.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by dbhalling 10 years ago
    Note Cicero and Locke would not have agreed "he is emphatic in stressing that a natural justice means that one must never do harm and must always serve the common good." This is Utilitarianism and always leads to socialism. There is no idea of the rights of the individual.

    He also thinks morality is something we have inherently "He points quite unambiguously to a divine source for this law and anticipates later developments of the notion of conscience by stressing that all humankind have a sense of the right within them, seeds needing nourishing and guidance to flourish as mature reason." I think history has proven him wrong.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      Locke defiantly added upon Cicero. The additional premise of the "rights of the individual" help to add much clarity to the nature of natural law, and I agree they would interpret natural law differently as they are approaching it with different perspectives. Although I think they would have agreed on many points as well.

      To bad the two never had a discussion between them. I suspect they both would have learned volumes and us with them.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 10 years ago
    I cannot thank you enough for this, Xenok. Important stuff here. I adore Cicero (more than one of those ;)). I was having a lively discussion with some people today over the fact that people are not really interested in the natural rights discussion at this level. they need the human interest part. My response-not in the Gulch and it's 18000 members. Reading now and response soon...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 10 years ago
    What's interesting about Cicero's position on natural rights is that it precedes the birth of Christianity, which is contrary to the position escribed by many modern Christians that the moral foundation of our Constitution comes entirely from the Bible. I suggest Gulch followers read "The 5,000 Year Leap", which details all of the foundations of our Founders' thinking, including Cicero and other early philosophers, Saxon and Iroquois (Haudenosaunee) government structures, and Biblical guidance from Deuteronomy.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by dbhalling 10 years ago
      It is beyond absurd to suggest that the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence had anything to do with Christianity. The Constitution is heavily modeled off of the Roman Republic and the Declaration is based on Individual Rights which are a rejection of christian ethos.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by DrZarkov99 10 years ago
        The one Biblical reference in any of the Founders' writings is to Deuteronomy, which is Old Testament. The only possible relation I've ever found to New Testament is Jesus comment about rendering unto Caesar those things that have to do with Caesar, which implies separation of church and state, and part of the First Amendment (which technically, isn't a direct part of the Constitution). With all of the things in Christian teaching directed at self-sacrifice for the good of others it does seem very much at odds with the principle of individual rights espoused in the Constitution.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo