Originally posted by no1marauderI'm not going to keep posting in this forum, but Natural Law is no more a PRODUCT of human reason than the law of gravity is. It is astonishing to me that theists are so lacking in basic philosophical knowledge that they can't understand this very simple point, but they over and over assert this rubbish. What the natural law is and its existence can be discovered by human reason, but it exists whether human beings in an individual or collective capacity realize it. The way reality is IS whether we have "reasoned" about it or not. Natural law as regards human beings is a product of their nature, not their reason.
I'm not going to keep posting in this forum, but Natural Law is no more a PRODUCT of human reason than the law of gravity is. It is astonishing to me that theists are so lacking in basic philosophical knowledge that they can't understand this very simple point, but they over and over assert this rubbish. What the natural law is and its existen ...[text shortened]... t it or not. Natural law as regards human beings is a product of their nature, not their reason.
Of course the natural law is a product of their nature. Because they are made in the image of God. Perhaps this is one of the proofs of God's existence.
There is a distinction between the physical laws which all are compelled to obey, and this 'natural law', the one that teaches us right from wrong but does not compel us to obey. We are free to decide if we will do what we know we should do, and be safe, or deny its valid claims, and be unsafe.
2 edits
Originally posted by chinking58Yes, that is the theist position, particulary that of the Roman Catholic Church. But there is insufficient evidence to show that God exists at all, whereas the evidence that human beings exist is fairly strong. And from history we know that certain moral principles have been uniformly held by human beings, even those who did not believe in any God, much less a Christian one. This is evidence that there is a Natural Law that human beings follow EVERY DAY. In short, we see in our lives and in our actions the manifestions of the Natural Law, but we do not see a God. Instead you create a God to explain our nature; this might be a plausible explanation, but since you lack any proof of such a being you'll pardon me for remaining unconvinced.
[b/] I'm not going to keep posting in this forum, but Natural Law is no more a PRODUCT of human reason than the law of gravity is. It is astonishing to me that theists are so lacking in basic philosophical knowledge that they ca ...[text shortened]... should do, and be safe, or deny its valid claims, and be unsafe.
Halitose: your distinction between "science" and Natural Law is unpersuasive; the law of gravity is a description of a relationship between objects which we can observe. The Nature Law is a description of the principles upon which Man acts by his very nature and those acts can be observed as well. I see no difference. See quote below.
If there be in nature such a principle as justice, such a principle as honesty, such principles as we describe by the words mine and thine, such principles as men's natural rights of person and property, then we have an immutable and universal law; a law that we can learn, as we learn any other science; a law that tells us what is just and what is unjust, what is honest and what is dishonest, what things are mine and what things are thine, what are my rights of person and property and what are your rights of person and property, and where is the boundary between each and all of my rights of person and property and each and all of your rights of person and property. And this law is the paramount law, and the same law, over all the world, at all times, and for all peoples; and will be the same paramount and only law, at all times, and for all peoples, so long as man shall live upon the earth.
Lysander Spooner
Originally posted by no1marauderMarauder: "I'm not going to keep posting in this forum ..... "
I'm not going to keep posting in this forum, but Natural Law is no more a PRODUCT of human reason than the law of gravity is. It is astonishing to me that theists are so lacking in basic philosophical knowledge that they can't understand this very simple point, but they over and over assert this rubbish. What the natural law is and its existen ...[text shortened]... t it or not. Natural law as regards human beings is a product of their nature, not their reason.
..... again ? ...... 😵
1 edit
Originally posted by ivanhoeActually I might keep posting for two reasons: 1) This discussion is fairly interesting - would you like to add something to it rather than merely troll? and B) You don't want me to and it is part of human nature to resist control by petty tyrants.
Marauder: "I'm not going to keep posting in this forum ..... "
..... again ? ...... 😵
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderSure. I never denied the existance of Natural Law. Only, unlike The Law of Gravity, where if I jump off a cliff I always fall, there are many people who live contrary to Natural Law. Perhaps it is never a law to begin with, merely a hint in the right direction. Every individual if free to choose whether they obey Natural Law or not, whereas with Gravity its just a given that you will fall when you jump.
If there be in nature such a principle as justice, such a principle as honesty, such principles as we describe by the words mine and thine, such principles as men's natural rights of person and property, then we have an immutable and u ...[text shortened]... les, so long as man shall live upon the earth.
Lysander Spooner
Originally posted by no1marauderC) Anyone can change their mind if they want to.
Actually I might keep posting for two reasons: 1) This discussion is fairly interesting - would you like to add something to it rather than merely troll? and B) You don't want me to and it is part of human nature to resist control by petty tyrants.
Originally posted by HalitoseIf you jumped off that cliff with a hang glider strapped to your back, you wouldn't fall would you? Does that mean there is no law of gravity?
Sure. I never denied the existance of Natural Law. Only, unlike The Law of Gravity, where if I jump off a cliff I always fall, there are many people who live contrary to Natural Law. Perhaps it is never a law to begin with, merely a hint in the right direction. Every individual if free to choose whether they obey Natural Law or not, whereas with Gravity its just a given that you will fall when you jump.
Originally posted by no1marauder
Actually I might keep posting for two reasons: 1) This discussion is fairly interesting - would you like to add something to it rather than merely troll? and B) You don't want me to and it is part of human nature to resist control by petty tyrants.
Well actually marauder, you are making sense for a change .... if you keep debating the way you are now, you are welcome to stay ..... 😉
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderMaybe the Natural Law is a description of the relation as it should be between God and human beings, between the Father and His children .....
Yes, that is the theist position, particulary that of the Roman Catholic Church. But there is insufficient evidence to show that God exists at all, whereas the evidence that human beings exist is fairly strong. And from history w ...[text shortened]... cts can be observed as well. I see no difference. See quote below.
Marauder: "In short, we see in our lives and in our actions the manifestions of the Natural Law, but we do not see a God."
That remains to be seen. You might just as well claim that you do not see the Natural Law.
Originally posted by no1marauderYou are still falling, only a little slower. Stop clouding the issue here. Are you suggesting that we have mental gliders that allow the curcumvention of Natural Law?
If you jumped off that cliff with a hang glider strapped to your back, you wouldn't fall would you? Does that mean there is no law of gravity?
I agree with you in the existance of Natural Law. I still point out that there is no higher authority of appeal here.
Originally posted by HalitoseWhat of it? What if there is no higher appeal? I, for one, fail to see your point here.
You are still falling, only a little slower. Stop clouding the issue here. Are you suggesting that we have mental gliders that allow the curcumvention of Natural Law?
I agree with you in the existance of Natural Law. I still point out that there is no higher authority of appeal here.
Originally posted by HalitoseI am merely saying that the fact that Men can find ways to circumvent physical laws does not mean that they do not exist. Why should the fact that men can disobey Natural Law mean it doesn't exist?
You are still falling, only a little slower. Stop clouding the issue here. Are you suggesting that we have mental gliders that allow the curcumvention of Natural Law?
I agree with you in the existance of Natural Law. I still point out that there is no higher authority of appeal here.
Why is one necessary? It is sufficient that the Natural Law exists, and that Men in the vast majority of cases adhere to it. After that, you are simply arguing about the content of the Natural Law and if and how it should be enforced, not its existence.
Originally posted by no1marauderI agree that all humans everywhere have always held the same basic 'laws' to be important. This is evidence of commonality. I suppose if we all obeyed these laws as we do the physical laws, that could demonstrate merely a common evolutionary ancestor.
Yes, that is the theist position, particulary that of the Roman Catholic Church. But there is insufficient evidence to show that God exists at all, whereas the evidence that human beings exist is fairly strong. And from history we know that certain moral principles have been uniformly held by human beings, even those who did not believe in any God ...[text shortened]... by his very nature and those acts can be observed as well. I see no difference. See quote below.
We HAVE the law EVERY DAY. But we don't follow it every day.
The fact that we don't always obey the natural law (though we hold others to the standard), I think, upholds the idea of a God. An implanter of the law, a source of conscience which scolds us when we disobey the law, and the Judge we fear knowing we choose to disobey regularly.
I addressed the difference in the laws in a post above No. 1. What do you think of those ideas?
Originally posted by no1marauderOf course not. The law of gravity works with all of the other laws (such as aerodynamics) in a perfectly consistent manner. It certainly does effect the hang glider according to its nature.
If you jumped off that cliff with a hang glider strapped to your back, you wouldn't fall would you? Does that mean there is no law of gravity?