Classical Naturalism

The principles you've mentioned seem to reflect elements of natural law theory, a perspective in
jurisprudence that emphasizes a moral or ethical basis for law. Let's break down these principles:
1. *The laws' nature is declared by God Himself:* this suggests that natural law is considered to be
rooted in divine principles. According to this view, moral and legal principles are inherent in the order
established by a divine authority or a higher power.
2. *These are superior in obligations to any other law:* Natural law is seen as the highest and most
fundamental source of moral and legal principles. It is considered to take precedence over any other form
of law, including human-made or positive law.
3. *These are binding for everyone regardless of time and space:* Natural law is often regarded as
universal and timeless. It is seen as applying to all individuals, irrespective of their geographic location or
the era in which they live.
4. *No human laws (man-made laws) are of any validity if not in conformity with natural law:* This
principle suggests that for a human-made law to be considered valid and just, it must align with the moral
and ethical principles of natural law. In other words, human laws should not contradict or contravene the
fundamental principles of natural law.
5. *An unjust law is no law:* This principle is often associated with natural law theory and suggests that
laws that are inherently unjust or morally wrong are not deserving of the label "law." In other words, a
law that goes against the principles of natural law is considered illegitimate.
Natural law theory, as represented by these principles, asserts that there are objective, universal, and
divine moral and legal principles that underlie human legal systems. It emphasizes the idea that law
should be based on morality and that individuals have a duty to follow laws that are just and in harmony
with these underlying moral principles. However, this perspective can be subject to various interpretations
and debates regarding the nature and content of these universal moral principles.
Neo-Naturalism
Neo-naturalism, as described here, is a legal theory that suggests that the fundamental purpose of law is to
provide a justification for the use of state coercion. In other words, law serves as a mechanism that allows
the state to enforce its rules and policies, and this use of force is considered legitimate when it is in
accordance with the law.
Key points about this concept:
1. *Justification for State Coercion:* Neo-naturalism argues that one of the primary roles of law is to
provide a rational and justifiable basis for the state to exercise coercion. This coercion can take the form
of enforcing rules, making arrests, imposing penalties, and ensuring compliance with legal standards.
2. *Unjust Law and Legal Validity:* the noteworthy aspect of this theory is the idea that a law can be
legally valid even if it is considered unjust. In other words, a law may conform to the legal system's
requirements, such as being enacted through proper procedures, without necessarily being morally or
ethically just. This concept highlights a distinction between legality and morality.
3. *Legal Positivism vs. Neo-Naturalism:* Neo-naturalism stands in contrast to legal positivism, which
asserts that the validity of law is solely determined by its creation through established legal processes.
Neo-naturalism introduces the idea that the content of a law should be morally justifiable to some extent.
4. *Criticism:* this perspective has been met with criticism. Critics argue that it can be challenging to
draw a clear line between what is legally valid and what is morally just, leading to potential
inconsistencies and disagreements about the legitimacy of certain laws.
In essence, neo-naturalism acknowledges that there may be a distinction between legal validity and moral
justice. It emphasizes that, from a legal perspective, a law can be valid as long as it complies with legal
procedures, even if it is perceived as unjust or morally problematic. This perspective raises important
questions about the relationship between legality and morality within the legal system.
Procedural naturalism
Lon Fuller's concept of "procedural morality" in the context of procedural naturalism emphasizes that for
a legal system to be just and morally sound, it should adhere to certain principles or procedures. Here's an
explanation of the eight principles you mentioned:
1. *Rules must be explained in general terms:* Legal rules should be formulated in a way that people
can understand them without requiring specialized knowledge. This ensures that individuals can
reasonably foresee the consequences of their actions and make informed choices.
2. *Rules must be publicly promulgated:* Legal rules should be made known to the public. They
should be easily accessible and not kept secret or hidden. Transparency in rule-making is essential for
fairness and accountability.
3. *Rules must be prospective:* Laws should apply to future actions and conduct rather than
retroactively affecting past behavior. This principle safeguards the predictability of legal rules.
4. *Rules must be in understandable terms:* Legal rules should be clear and not overly complex or
ambiguous. They should use language that the average person can comprehend, promoting clarity and
fairness in their application.
5. *Rules must be consistent with one another:* Legal rules should be internally consistent and not
contradictory. When different laws conflict, it can create confusion and undermine the rule of law.
6. *Rules must not require conduct beyond the power of the citizens:* Legal requirements should be
realistic and achievable by the average person. Imposing impossible or unreasonable obligations is unjust.
7. *Rules must not be changed frequently:* Constant changes to laws can lead to instability and
unpredictability. Legal systems should provide a degree of stability and continuity.
8. *Rules must be administered in a manner consistent with their wording:* The way laws are
enforced and applied should align with the language and intent of the rules. Inconsistent or arbitrary
enforcement can undermine the rule of law.
These principles reflect Fuller's view that legal systems should not only be concerned with the content of
the laws but also with the processes and procedures that ensure fairness, predictability, and justice in their
application. Adhering to these principles is believed to help create a just and morally sound legal system.