Thursday, October 22, 2009

What is the "Natural Law"? Part IV

In the previous posting in this immensely popular series (although not as popular as "Justice, Justice, Thou Shalt Pursue" — on which we've even gotten visitors from Tokyo and Belgium, as well as many points in-between) we hinted that there are some problems associated with the approaches that assume that you can only approach the natural law from either faith or reason, instead of faith and reason.

Oddly enough, the only problem (although it is significant) with the "reason alone" people is that they tend to reject anything relating to ethics — moral philosophy — as faith-based, and thus having no place in civil society. This actually goes against their own principles, but it's enough to insert a great deal of confusion into modern society. It's really materialism, not reason. The bottom line is that anything labeled "morality" is, ipso facto, "religion," and must be actively suppressed.

Unfortunately, faith-based people tend to overreact and make two mistakes to the materialists' one. One, when the dictates of reason seem to be in contradiction to their interpretation of revelation, there is a strong tendency to claim that reason must be in error because it contradicts their personal faith. Two (and much more serious), people who base the law on faith have a very, very strong tendency to try and force their specific religious beliefs and practices on others, using the coercive power of the State to enforce their demands.

In reaction, the materialists reinforce their claim that anything based on the natural law — moral philosophy (ethics) — is therefore "religion" and must never be imposed by force. This is a half-truth that starts the cycle all over again. The only results are an intensification of the conflict, increasing levels of frustration, prejudice, and bigotry on both sides, and widespread confusion about the nature of the human person and of society itself that only leads to even more confusion. The materialists and the religion-based individuals and groups both end up supporting their positions on the basis of faith, not of reason.

The basic issue remains unaddressed. If the natural law is found in reason alone, as Aquinas maintained, it applies to everybody. No one is exempted from the obligation to acquire and develop virtue and thereby become more fully human. If, however, the natural law is found only in some revelation — even the revelation of "science" — then only believers in that revelation can become more fully human. By logical development of this belief, it becomes imperative on whoever believes in the divine origin of a specific revelation must force it on others for the others' own good, whether you call it faith or reason.

The implications of this will be covered in the next (and final) posting in this series.

#30#