Legal Positivism And Natural Law

Natural law is the belief that law, and morality are intertwined. There are several notable theorists whom believe that natural law should be applied to our legal system and to the law-making bodies. St. Thomas Aquinas and lon Fuller both represent ancient and modern natural law respectively and both believe that natural law should be applicable to our society. On the other hand, legal positivism is the belief that law, and morality are two separate entities. Some notable theorists that believe legal positivism should be applied to our legal system as well as to our law-making bodies include, H.L.A Hart and Dworkin. This essay will discuss both legal positivism and natural law regarding the application of the law as well as the relevant theorists …show more content…
Thomas Aquinas was one of the founding fathers of natural law. Aquinas's theory is greatly based on religion and consists of four elements, Eternal Law, Natural Law, Divine Law, and Human Law . Eternal law as Aquinas describes it to be is gods plan for the universe which is only known to god. Man needs this law as they would lack any direction without it . Natural Law is how gods plan is reveled to us, this can be in several ways including, scriptures and the messenger of gods will . Natural Law is established when man uses their reason to work out gods will, this will then result in Human Law as it is the application of gods will and is necessary to solve day to day issues and is also used to enforce the natural law . Theoretically, the application of Aquinas theory in society would be a straightforward matter as Aquinas believes that as natural beings, we are naturally guided to follow gods eternal plan. However, Aquinas theory is mainly focused in the law-making process and not the application of the law. This raises the question of, how would Aquinas's be applied in different cases? This is where Aquinas theory falls short. How would his theory be applicable in cases that are not straightforward? For example, murder according to Aquinas is immoral and goes against the law. However, what would the judgment be if the act was committed in self-defense. Should the same ruling apply, or should the judge take into consideration the circumstances and rule in such a way were the immoral act of murder would not be punished. Furthermore, Aquinas theory was developed during a time where Christianity and other monocentric religions were dominant as comparted to today, were multiculturalism and atheism are more prevalent than before. This raises the question how does Aquinas theory apply to judges who do not believe in religion? Additionally, Aquinas's theory does not give any ethical guidance to those making decisions . This could result in the application of a