Discussion Thread: Ancient Pre-Cursers of Natural Law
What pre-cursors to Natural Law concepts are present in the political ideas of Plato and
Aristotle? Be sure to include a discussion of justice and statesmanship in your answer.
Natural Law is the theory that human beings possess intrinsic values that govern their
reasoning and behavior. This theory suggests that people inherently know right from wrong and
that such rules do not have to be created by societies or court systems to be known. Modern
Natural Law seems to claim it is derived from God, Plato did not think his belief of “nature” or
“naturally just” came from a higher being, though he did believe in one1. Plato believed his
concept of “nature” to be governed by that of a higher order, rather than a superhuman authority
commanding good and prohibiting evil2.
Though Plato rarely mentions “natural law” in his writings, he frequently discusses
“nature” and “law” as almost two separate ideas that oppose each other. This, however, is what
Plato ultimately puts into question, the opposition between the two, specifically in his work, the
Republic, using justice. Socrates argues with Callicles over their view of what is “natural” or
“naturally just”. Socrates explains that what is naturally just or right comes from the human
goods which is the goods of the soul3. Plato disagreed with the Sophists in their belief that right,
wrong, justice, and injustice are not what matter, rather who was the strongest – therefore, it is
“natural” to for the strong to rule the weak4. Arguing that this was the way of human nature. For
Plato, he felt that human nature could not be reduced to the strong ruling over the weak5. Justice,
injustice, right, wrong, and the good all mattered. Especially in his idealistic, utopian, orderly
city.
Plato’s idea of goodness is where we see some pre-cursors to Natural Law. According to
Plato, we live in an orderly world where the nature of this world are forms, with the most
important form being “good6.” In the Republic, Plato examines the “natural justice” that exists
within a properly ordered soul and city7. Plato emphasizes on the ideal, an ideal city and the ideal
way to govern said city, and people in the most ideal form – intrinsically good/just in nature8.
The good or “naturally just”, Plato argues, is inherent in reality as a fact and not as a connection
“of a fact to a norm presupposed by the observer…9” Plato’s idea of statesmanship also follows
this idealistic vision. Plato explains how the statesman should be an expert, however, the
requirements which Plato sets for a statesman potentially suggest that no human being will ever
qualify10. It is explained that a statesman is necessary, though, because they do what no law can
which is discern, advise, and direct in situations where the law just sees in a general sense
instead of looking at the circumstances11. It appears as though Plato essentially ends up saying
1 Hans Kelsen, “Plato and the Doctrine of Natural Law,” Vanderbilt Law Review 14, no. 1 (1960).
2 Ibid
3 Plato, The Dialogues of Plato (Humphrey Milford: Oxford University Press, 1892).
4 Malcolm Schofield, “Approaching the Republic.” In The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political
Thought, ed. Christopher Rowe and Malcolm Schofield (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).
5 Ibid
6 Plato, The Dialogues of Plato (Humphrey Milford: Oxford University Press, 1892).
7 Ibid
8 Ibid
9 Hans Kelsen, “Plato and the Doctrine of Natural Law,” Vanderbilt Law Review 14, no. 1 (1960), 26.
10 Christopher Rowe, “The Politicus and other dialogues.” In The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political
Thought, ed. Christopher Rowe and Malcolm Schofield (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).
that statesmanship exists without being an actual, tangible concept, and that one has access to it
if they “look for it in the right way12.”
Aristotle was influenced by Plato in many ways, especially since Plato was his teacher,
but even Aristotle splits from Plato’s way of thinking about “nature.” Aristotle does agree with
Plato that goal of a political community is the happiness of the citizens; however, while Plato’s
approach was more idealistic, Aristotle’s is more realistic and practical. Aristotle claims that a
city-state “comes into being for the sake of living but continues in existence for the sake of living
well13” – showing the goal of people is happiness. Aristotle also says, “The state exists not for
the sake of wealth or security or society, but for the sake of a good life14.” Aristotle’s beliefs also
differ from Plato’s in the way that he felt as long as the people as a whole were not deficient then
there was no need for a monarchy, that the wisdom of the majority was better15 Aristotle argues
that nature is not created by elements outside of it, but rather the thing is nature16, which is
similar to how Plato views nature.
With Plato’s ideal way of how people are and how things should be governed, he
promoted kingship as the ideal constitution. Since Aristotle’s beliefs were more realistic than
idealistic, he promotes the concept that there are different forms of constitutions that are best for
different forms of natural association17. Aristotle’s concept of political justice, which is that
freedom is the key for citizens to be able to live their best life and to subject themselves to the
laws and state18. Whereas the Republic suggests justice is achieved when the individual’s role in
society match their qualities. These qualities are what Plato considers inherent nature that is
intrinsically in a person to match their role in society which helps maintain social order.
Aristotle’s take on “teleos” laid the groundwork that shows God’s presence which is seen in the
Natural Law theory.
To summarize, Plato argues that human action and motivation are regulated by “nature”
or what is “naturally just.” He then states there are natural principles that are created into sets of
laws so that individuals and communities can govern themselves. Though Plato ultimately felt as
though the way to maintain social harmony is the creation of his idealistic, orderly city, where
there is an order to society that follows what is natural and the citizens are governed by a
monarch constitution. On the other hand, Aristotle considers that different forms of government
will work for different communities. A just government to Aristotle is a government that
provides what is needed for their citizens’ happiness. Aristotle contends that virtues are
necessary for individuals and in statesmanship. The concept of virtue is prevalent in both
philosophers’ writings which is found in Natural Law.
Bibliography
11 Christopher Rowe, “The Politicus and other dialogues.” In The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political
Thought, ed. Christopher Rowe and Malcolm Schofield (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).
12 Christopher Rowe, “The Politicus and other dialogues.” In The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political
Thought, ed. Christopher Rowe and Malcolm Schofield (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 238.
13 Aristotle, The Politics of Aristotle (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1885), 29-30.
14 Aristotle, The Politics of Aristotle (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1885).
15 Ibid
16 Ibid
17 Christopher Rowe, “The Politicus and other dialogues.” In The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political
Thought, ed. Christopher Rowe and Malcolm Schofield (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 238.
18 David Keyt, “Aristotelian Freedom.” In The Oxford Handbook of Freedom, ed. David Schmidt and
Carmen E. Pavel (Oxford University Press, 2016).
Aristotle. The Politics of Aristotle. Translated by Benjamin Jowett. Vol. 1-2. Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1885.
Devereux, Daniel.“Classical Political Philosophy: Plato and Aristotle.” In The Oxford Handbook
of the History of Political Philosophy, edited by George Klosko. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2011.
Kelsen, Hans. “Plato and the Doctrine of Natural Law.”Vanderbilt Law Review14,
no. 1 (1960): 23-64.
Keyt, David. “Aristotelian Freedom.” In The Oxford Handbook of Freedom, edited by David
Schmidt and Carmen E. Pavel. Oxford University Press, 2016.
Miller Jr., Fred.“Naturalism.” In The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political
Thought, edited by Christopher Rowe and Malcolm Schofield, 321-43. The Cambridge
History of Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Plato.The Dialogues of Plato. Translated by Benjamin Jowett. 3rd ed. Vol. 3. London:
Humphrey Milford: Oxford University Press, 1892.
Pope, Stephen. “Reason and Natural Law.” InThe Oxford Handbook of Theological Ethics,
edited by Gilbert Meilaender and William Werpehowski. Oxford, England: Oxford
University Press, 2007.
Roberts, Jean. “Justice and the Polis.” In The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political
Thought, edited by Christopher Rowe and Malcolm Schofield. The Cambridge History of
Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Rowe, Christopher. “The Politicus and other dialogues.” In The Cambridge History of Greek and
Roman Political Thought, edited by Christopher Rowe and Malcolm Schofield. The
Cambridge History of Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Schofield, Malcolm. “Approaching the Republic.” In The Cambridge History of Greek and
Roman Political Thought, edited by Christopher Rowe and Malcolm Schofield. The
Cambridge History of Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Replies: Colton + John
Colton,
I appreciate your analysis here of Plato and Aristotle’s political ideas and how they relate to
Natural Law concepts.
I understand the part where you discuss how the fact that the conclusions were that human beings
are not morally perfect and can see how that has probably played into why some Christians want
to create a Christian community and believe the rules of the bible should be put into laws of the
state.
Though Paul (Romans 2:14-15) does discuss the concept of Natural Law when talking about the
laws of the Gentiles,
“For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they
are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work
of the law is written on their hearts…19”
For Christians, this indicates that there is some sort of naturally knowing what is right and what
is wrong. However, this does not mean people are just going to do good. Just because one knows
what is good, does not require them to do good. Of course, human moral perfection does not
exist like Aristotle came to realize20, God gave free will for a reason, because there was a choice
to be made. If human perfection existed, free will would not be necessary. Morality and religion
are not the same. Religion requires a responsibility or duty to a higher power, whereas morals
require a responsibility or duty to each other. One can possess morals that coincide with laws
within a religion because the responsibilities overlap, but that does not mean that morals come
from religion. However, there is an argument for justice rooted in convention rather than nature,
as discussed by Aristotle. That know things and establish it as good or just because it is what
they know and are accustomed to doing21.
I appreciate how you point out that Plato’s the Republic is trying to create this ideal situation
where justice and virtue is the main focus of the political world22. And whereas this is a good
concept and the quote you use would be true, Plato focuses too much on the ideal situations in an
ideal world if human beings were and wanted to be inherently good, not just knew what was
good.
Bibliography:
19 Romans 2:14-15 (ESV)
20 Aristotle, The Politics of Aristotle (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1885).
21 Ibid
22 Plato, The Dialogues of Plato (Humphrey Milford: Oxford University Press, 1892).
Aristotle. The Politics of Aristotle. Translated by Benjamin Jowett. Vol. 1-2. Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1885.
Plato.The Dialogues of Plato. Translated by Benjamin Jowett. 3rd ed. Vol. 3. London:
Humphrey Milford: Oxford University Press, 1892.
April,
Your analysis here of Plato and Aristotle’s political ideas and their connection to Natural Law
concepts is clearly explained.
I appreciate how you made very clear that Plato was more interested in the soul and the nature of
good rather than the laws, justice, or how the government worked23. Whereas Aristotle’s focus
was more on the world, justice, and the mechanisms of government24. As you mentioned,
Aristotle does owe a great deal to Plato, especially since Aristotle was one of his students. Even
though their ultimate ideas and thinking differ, they do both have the same general belief that
“the goal of a political community is the general happiness of its members, and a decisive factor
in achieving this goal is the design of the constitution25.” However, Plato’s thinking was more
idealistic and not conceivable in the actual world, “Plato’s deepest interests were always on the
interior side of the human condition. He was more interested in the soul than in the body, the
nature of the Good rather than the laws of the physical world, the idea of justice rather than the
mechanisms of government26.” On the other hand, Aristotle’s approach was more realistic and
practical27. This difference is also seen in the discussion of justice and statesmanship. Where
Plato’s idea of a statesman is impossible to obtain with the required knowledge and expertise
Plato demands of them. This seems to be connected to his idealistic way of thinking being only
concerned with the soul and obtaining this moral perfection28. Aristotle seems to take his beliefs
in a more realistic way concerning statesmanship.
Even though in the Bible, Paul (Romans 2:14-15) does discuss concepts of Natural Law,
“For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they
are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work
of the law is written on their hearts…29”
23 Plato, The Dialogues of Plato (Humphrey Milford: Oxford University Press, 1892).
24 Aristotle, The Politics of Aristotle (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1885).
25 Daniel Devereux, “Classical Political Philosophy: Plato and Aristotle.” In The Oxford Handbook of the History of
Political Philosophy, ed. George Klosko (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 16.
26 John L. Hill, After the Natural Law: How the Classical Worldview Supports Our Modern Moral and Political
Values (San Francisco, Ca: Ignatius Press, 2016).
27 Daniel Devereux, “Classical Political Philosophy: Plato and Aristotle.” In The Oxford Handbook of the History of
Political Philosophy, ed. George Klosko (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 16.
28 Plato, The Dialogues of Plato (Humphrey Milford: Oxford University Press, 1892).
29 Romans 2:14-15 (ESV)
We as Christians only say it comes from our God because that is what/who we believe in. There
is an argument here for the idea that Natural Law is not based in a specific religion, that human
beings just have an intrinsic knowledge of what is good and just, a set of morals and that religion
just adds onto those morals with duty to a higher power.
Bibliography:
Aristotle. The Politics of Aristotle. Translated by Benjamin Jowett. Vol. 1-2. Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1885.
Devereux, Daniel.“Classical Political Philosophy: Plato and Aristotle.” In The Oxford Handbook
of the History of Political Philosophy, edited by George Klosko. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2011.
Hill, John L. After the Natural Law: How the Classical Worldview Supports Our Modern Moral
and Political Values. San Francisco, Ca: Ignatius Press, 2016.
Plato.The Dialogues of Plato. Translated by Benjamin Jowett. 3rd ed. Vol. 3. London:
Humphrey Milford: Oxford University Press, 1892.
