Natural Law Vs Positivism Essay

Throughout history, there has been many debate over theorist in which set of laws is right to live by. Natural Law is one of the oldest theory of law that deals with human nature and sets of moral principles from god. Natural Law theorist such as, Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, and John Locke obey the laws that promote the greater good for society. The other law is Positivism; Positivism is the opposite of natural law where humans such as, the government and legislatures create the laws. Positivist theorist such as, Jeremy Bentham, John Austin believed in a society where they obey laws that were created by the public opinion. Each present their own explanation of law is the best to fit society.
Natural Law is a moral theory of jurisprudence in which the law was based on ethics and morality. According to Wolfe (2003), Natural Law says how human being are consider certain kinds of being and that being should understand how human beings should live. These laws are based off purpose, not based on the words. It is sets of laws that are not written down. It is a universal application in determining if a human action is considered right or wrong. Part of the laws is the moral obligation to obey the law. However, is it far for people to respect laws that they feel unfair? Natural law theorists believe that humans have free will and they …show more content…
Metropolitan Life Company (1910). Where the plaintiff wanted to get the money for his wife’s life insurance policy. It was about 200 dollars, but the insurance company did not want to pay him because he killed his wife. The plaintiff was convicted of manslaughter and was sentenced to prison for six years. The lower courts ruled in favor of the insurance company, however the plaintiff, Mr. Filmore filed appeal The court mentioned in another previous case it was said that if one’s life were taken (murder, manslaughter) then the beneficiary would not be able to receive the insurance