-
Essay on the Foundation of Natural Law and on the First Principle of the Obligation Men Find Themselves Under to Observe Law
- Liberty Fund
- Chapter
- Additional Information
747 Essay on the Foundation of Natural Law and on the First Principle of the Obligation Men Find Themselves Under to Observe Laws1 Translated by T. J. Hochstrasser What is the goal of those who teach natural law and ethics? Is it not to bring men to the observance of justice and the practice of virtue? —The Author I. Natural laws, natural jurisprudence, and moral sciencearethreethings that are often confused in ordinary language because they all three have the same object: to know how to order the customs and conductof men. But in handling a topic clearly and securely it is necessary to separateout carefully those issues that are in reality distinct. II. A law is in general a rule by which we are obliged to determine our actions; and natural laws, in particular, are those that we derive from nature, or whose rationale is found in the essence and nature of man, and of things in general. III. Natural jurisprudence is a general theory of the duties of man, considered simply as man, or a science, which teaches us what is naturally good or bad in man, what he must and must not do. IV. Moral science or ethics is a practical science, which teaches us how we should direct our faculties to practice what is good, and avoid what 1. [[For persons and books referred to in these essays, see the biographicalsketches and the bibliography of works cited by Vattel. Droit has been translated as “right” or “law,” according to context. Utile/utilité has been translated as “self-interest,”“expediency ,” or “interest,” according to context. Honnêteté and its cognates have been translated as “integrity.”]] 748 additional essays is bad. Often the term moral science is employed to designate the study of behavior ingeneral,andinthissenseitincludesnaturallaw andethics. Sometimes moral science seems to mean the theory of our duties, insofar as we are obliged to employ them, for ourselves, as rational creatures; and natural law includes the theory of these same duties insofar as we are bound to them in respect of other men, as members of human society , or as others have the right to require that we observe them. But our distinction (§III) is more tidy and convenient, and it contains everything , for natural law comprises also our duties toward ourselves. V. With that established, we look for the foundation of natural law, and the principle which compels us to practice what it prescribes for us, and avoid what it forbids us. On these two points there have been major disputes among the learned. VI. If by the foundation of natural law we understand the source from which can be derived the rules and precepts; the principle in which is found what can provide an explanation for why these rules and precepts are as they are, then we would not wish to look further than in the essence and nature of man and things in general. For, since natural law is the science which tells us what is naturally good or bad in man (§III), how shall we determine what is naturally good or bad for him, if not through his essence and nature, and by the nature and essence of things, through considering the degree of suitability between actions and this essence and this nature? This truth is confirmed a posteriori or by experience. To determine whether someone has given an accurate idea of the laws of nature, examine what there is in man and in other things that is in accordance with their essence and nature, and you will see how you will understand clearly from that why our free actions must be regulated and determined in the manner that natural law prescribes.2 It would be easy to give examples of this. But each person can put this to the test for himself. 2. See Wolff, Phil. Pract. Univ., part I, §cxxxvii. [54.159.186.146] Project MUSE (2024-03-28 20:51 GMT) foundation of natural law 749 VII. All the authors of different systems are obliged to agree with what we have just established, whatever their sense may be of the principle of obligation, which we shall speak of presently. Those who delude themselves that natural law was invented for the benefit of human society, must agree that the source of this view can only bethe natureandessence of things and of man in particular. For, I ask you, where could these would-be inventors have learned with such certainty that some actions are...