1
Book Review: After the Natural Law
Name of Student
Affiliation
Course
Instructor
Date
2
Overview
Human morality and freedom have been discussed vastly in the history of human
civilization. Ancient and modern philosophers and scholars have contributed their thoughts and
understanding of the two concepts like Aristotle, Plato, Aquinas, Hobbes, Luther, Hooker,
Calvin, and Locke among others. The book, “After the Natural Law: How the Classical
Worldview Supports Our Modern Moral and Political Values” by John Lawrence Hill published
in 2016 examines the extensive ate between modern and ancient philosophers about the morality
and freedom of individuals in society. The examination is based on natural law and key concepts
related to moral and political freedom like human rights, freedom, responsibility, equality, and
human dignity. A critical review of the book will provide insights of the different concepts
related to human freedom and morality can be applied in public policy.
Book Purpose
The purpose of Hill writing the book, “After the Natural Law: How the Classical
Worldview Supports Our Modern Moral and Political Values” was to provide insights of
changes in views and perceptions related to natural law, political freedom, and morality in
society. The book shows how the cont of natural laws have evolved base on the contribution of
different thinkers in different timelines and how they have come to influence the contemporary
society. The book is divided into different sub sections to distinguish the ancient and modern
philosophers and scholars. Hill (2016) helps get an in-depth understanding of other concepts
related to democracy, positive law, and covenantal statesmanship. The review will start by
providing an in-depth understanding of natural law and then examine how it is presented in the
book of John Lawrence Hill, “After the Natural Law: How the Classical Worldview Supports
Our Modern Moral and Political Values.”
Natural Law and Positive Law
There is no definite description of the tem natural laws. Philosophers and scholars have
taken different stances and perception in describing the tem natural law. However, the
philosophers have based their description on the relationship between moral value that govern
the society and the legal philosophy. Philosophers examine how legal principles and moral
principles shape each other to influence the behavior and attitude of people in society. The
relationship between moral values of the society and legal values representing political
backgrounds tat dictate the legal terms a society should follow. The stance between moral values
and political values are examined against the natural laws, or the intrinsic values that govern
human behaviors. Natural laws advocates for actions that are universally accepted. It is mainly
concerned with the moral viewpoints of the society. A natural law in society is not killing. No
matter which society a person is in, killing a person is prohibited. It is a value that would be
opposed universally as it limits and involves violation of another person’s freedom. Natural laws
follows that the rules that govern the society are not derived from external sources like the
society and court systems. Legal philosophy is based on the laws and values that govern human
behaviors derived from the society. They are laws derived based on the needs of people in
society that are not otherwise covered by the naturally derived values. They are refered to as the
positive laws. Positive law indicates that a certain action can be prohibited in one culture but
3
allowed in the other. An example is laws regulating LGBTQ, there are societies that allow it
based on legal aspects while others restricts it because it is not based on intrinsic values of
humans but the cultural values of the society.
The balance between positive laws and natural laws is always delicate and a source of the
great debate among philosophers for a very long time. The arguments presented by the different
philosophers highlight critical points that can be utilized in public policy to make them effective
in advocating for the needs of individuals as well as facilitating their freedom to distinguish
between right and wrong and good and bad. The argument between natural laws and positive
laws focus on the sources of moral values and political values in the contemporary society.
Critique
Analysis of ancient philosophers and modern philosophers can help determine whether
laws that govern society are based on natural laws, positive laws, or both. The existence of
natural law can be traced back to 2000 years. However, the early application of natural laws was
only based on observation as two major scholars develop concepts to indicate its evidence. The
majority of the arguments focus on determining whether law is inherent in the nature of man and
the world.
Plato works have very little link to the topic of natural laws but his student Aristotle
utilized his work to describe the concept comprehensively in a way that it guided the debate for
many years up to the contemporary society. The earliest ideas of natural laws can be traced to
Aristotle; also referred to as the father of natural laws. Aristotle argues that what is just by nature
is not always just by law because there was a natural justice that existed without people
criticizing it no matter the demographical background and it appeals them from the positive laws.
Aristotle argued that man can achieve maximum happiness and satisfaction through adhering to
mankind’s inherent nature. The inherent nature assumes that man knows between what is right
and wrong and pursuing only what is right is likely to bring happiness and satisfaction.
According to Aristotle, different customs and laws derive core values from nature that are
universally accepted and objective. It means that customs and laws may range from place to
place based on how the interpret nature. Aristotle derives the concepts of Plato that the world
operates under an order by stating that it is innate. Hill believes that Aristotle concept of natural
law was only valid if based on all people universally.
The application of Aristotle concept of natural law in the contemporary society can be
examined the way legal systems of the world are set. Even though states are in different
geographical location and their political perceptions or government have features that are similar.
Majority of the laws and customs that are similar across different societies represent the natural
laws that Aristotle defines. However, the differences on legal and cultural definition of ethical
and moral behaviors highlight the point of Aristotle that different society can define natural laws
based on their laws and customs. Aristotle would partly oppose and support the concept of
democracy as it is applied in the modern society. The reason is that democracy is exercised by
limiting the desires and needs of some individuals. Democracy does not represent the will of all
people universally but that which is accepted by a majority in society.
4
The problem with the perceptive is that Aristotle
Natural laws are undermined by Democracy
a) Natural law theories-Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Hooker, and Calvin
b) Relationship to democracy, covenantal statesmanship, and positive law/public policy
formation
Public Policy Application
References
Hill, J. L. (2016). After the natural law: How the classical worldview supports our modern moral
and political views. Ignatius Press.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/natural-law.asp
https://www.britannica.com/topic/natural-law/Natural-law-in-the-Enlightenment-and-the-
modern-era
