Introduction
For generations, many philosophers have added their ideas to natural law philosophy and its relationship to essential social perspectives, which include religion and politics. Their discussions often comprise topics related to the separation of religious and political offices, toleration of religious pluralism, statesmanship, democracy, positive law versus natural law, and public policy formation. The principal secular philosophers who contributed to modern natural law understanding include Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. These philosophers endeavored to connect social theory to its philosophical and scientific roots. Analysis of natural law concepts of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau reveals some departure from the classic Greco-Roman, medieval, and reformed Christian ideas of natural law. Today, some of their ideas are in the U.S. constitution and current American laws.
Hobbes
Thomas Hobbes employed atomism and materialism to his metaphysics. Hobbes assumed that all existence was matter and motion. Many of his peers believed Hobbes was an atheist (Zach 2010), although he used passages from the Holy Scriptures to support his arguments. His views departed from traditional natural law philosophy. For Hobbes, natural law could only prevail when people submit to sovereign commands. Because the sovereign became the definitive source of law, and the sovereign’s decisions did not originate from morality, then lawful positivism became more significant (Hobbes 1651). In the Leviathan, Hobbes says natural law is “a precept, or general rule, found out by reason, by which a man is forbidden to do that which is destructive of his life, or takes away the means of preserving the same; and to omit that by which he thinks it may best be preserved”(Hobbes 1651, 90).
Hobbes supported a powerful monarchy for his own politically unstable society. He began with his concept about the state of nature, which was life without government. Hobbes’ sought to resolve the practices and explanation for government with his comprehension of human nature (Hobbes 1651). For Hobbes, people in their natural condition are all roughly similar in strength, because the weak can kill the strong. Nature fails to make sociable people partly because people exist in protracted conditions where they fight against themselves. People seek out other people for their selfish glory, greed, or to scheme against other groups. Without the creation of stable governments, reasonable administrations, and just institutions, life in a state of nature is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (Hobbes 1651, 88).
Hobbes Right Reason support self-preservation. His Laws of Nature support doing whatever is necessary to maintain the real peace. However, an enforceable contract between groups is necessary to maintain the peace; although there is no guarantee, every person will do their part. Hobbes wrote that “covenants without the sword, are but words, and of no strength to secure a man at all” (Hobbes 1651, 111).
The social contract was Hobbes’ answer to life’s troubles in the state of nature. For Hobbes, an arrangement among people to surrender their powers, and handover all of their strength to the sovereign, or the Leviathan would solve the current problems. In response to their actions, the sovereign would maintain stability, which would allow all people to benefit from a civilized society, which includes a just lawful system, schooling for everyone, marriage, property ownership, a growing economy, and the proliferation of the arts and sciences (Zach 2010,139-143). Hobbes employ the biblical word Leviathan, which describes a great sea monster, a large aquatic reptile, or a great red dragon (Job 3:8; Psalms 74:14; 104:26; Isaiah 27:1, Revelation 12 :7-9, ESV), as a metaphor of the strength and power of the sovereign. In the Old Testament and New Testament Scriptures, God appears to be always against the Leviathan, which suggests that the biblical prophets were warning against tyrannical governments advocated by Hobbes.
Hobbes’ Leviathan wants complete dictatorial powers over the people, including the right to control their lives, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to draft people into military service, and to impose government restrictions on the population. The only rights people retained were the rights to preserve themselves, resist incarceration, and oppose execution. Laws were literally the commands of the sovereign (Hobbes 1651). When the people give the sovereign, the irreversible gift of power, then only self- resignation or defeat from foreign powers could bring down the government (Zach 2010). Hobbes’ social contract theory appears to be a recipe for the rise of tyrannical government, where only outside forces can remove the tyrant from power, which was what happened to Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany in the Second World War.
Locke
John Locke proposed a theory for thinkers, which supported education, psychology, science, and philosophy. Locke believed that the social contract was a covenant between either the people or their representatives and either the government or monarch. Since essential services for human existence along with necessary institutions already existed before the social contract, Locke believed the government was less essential like it was for Hobbes’ arguments. Because human societies survived and thrived long before the evolution of governments, societies would still survive if governments disappear for whatever reason. However, if people destroy their societies, then their actions would destroy their governments (Locke 1689).
In his First Treatise on Government, Locke argued against political philosopher Robert Filmer, who argued that only kings, who directly descended from Adam, had a divine right to rule. Locke argued that it was not possible to prove precisely any direct descent from Adam because people descended from male and female ancestors; therefore, patriarchal power is different from political power (Locke 1689). In his Second Treatise on Government, he identified natural law as God’s laws for humanity, which included the command for people to work for a living (Genesis 2:15; Genesis 3:19, Exodus 35:1-35, ESV). Since God gave the Earth and everything in it to humanity, Locke questioned why there was private property. The right to own private property is the foundation of Locke’s political philosophy, which encapsulates why people relate to God and to other people. Since people have self-preservation rights, then they should have the right to things, which will help people survive and thrive (Locke 1689).
Locke supported classical liberalism based on political and civil liberties, which would require a representative democracy. His ideas were in conflict with monarchy rule because the people did not choose their leaders since their leaders were prearranged through the leader’s blood-line. Royal families inherited leadership, and they were above the common law. This meant that laws were unstable because they did not apply to the leadership who would change laws because of the requirements of the aristocracy (Locke 1689).
Locke’s philosophy supports social contract theory, which guaranteed inalienable natural rights. He believes that governments did not have absolute authority because they are subject to God’s law. Locke believes that the state is part of a social contract with the people and can therefore lose its legitimacy if the state fails to support the contract. Locke’s political thinking influence the U.S. founding fathers (Evans 2002). Locke’s political philosophy conflicts with elements of Hobbes political ideas. In Locke’s State of Nature there was manufacturing, business, collaboration, and exchange. People are nonviolent with the exception of criminals. For Locke, Justice was guarantee through punishment, and government was necessary for sustaining civilized conditions (Locke 1689). Locke reveals his natural law philosophy in his Two Treatises of Government. Locke’s arguments on the state of nature, civil law, and protecting individual liberty reveal significant elements of his natural law thinking.
Rousseau
In The Social Contract, Jean-Jacques Rousseau begins with the memorable line, “Man was born free; and everywhere he is in chains” (Rousseau 1761, 35). Rousseau contends that a civil society with an authentic and just social contract rather than a deceitful or unjust social contract will provide people with a superior kind of liberty in exchange for their natural freedom, particularly their political freedom, which he believes is submission to their self-imposed law, which the “general will ” creates (Rousseau 1761). Rousseau combines diverse political philosophies. At the center of his analysis is his commitment to human liberty and equality, and advancing the collective goodwill of humanity. The Social Contract is Rousseau’s examination of a legitimate government. The legitimacy originates from the conception of a contract free people entered into; therefore, the contract develops a social nature. People enter into an agreement with civil society to preserve themselves and defend their liberties. The constitution and the laws, which govern the public life of the people, support this social contract because they affirm the will of the people, which Rousseau calls the “Sovereign” (Rousseau 1761). In other words, Rousseau’s principal argument in The Social Contract is that government achieves its right to exist and to govern through “the consent of the governed” (Rousseau 1761). For Rousseau, monarchs were not divinely empowered to legislate. When Rousseau wrote The Social Contract, this was a radical position for many people. In addition to his arguments in The Social Contract, Rousseau’s influence on natural law philosophy begins with him shifting the attention from the classical political conversation. His political writings merge the real with the ideal in its simplest words. Rousseau’s political writings advance modern natural law theory, while reassessing the importance of the whole natural law convention (Carbonneau 1979).
Conclusion
The writings of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau contributed to the rise of modern natural law philosophy, while departing from the Christian natural law thinking of Paul, Augustine, and Aquinas. Their arguments relating to the state of nature, civil condition, natural law, and natural rights, highlighted the significance of beginning social organizations. For these philosophers, social organizations can connect civil life with the state of nature. However, these philosophers had different opinions concerning the formation of the social contracts, natural law, and natural rights. Furthermore, the social contract philosophers likely derived their concept of social contract from reading about the covenantal relationship found in God’s Holy Scriptures. A covenant is an agreement between two or more persons to achieve particular objectives (Fischer 2016). For example, following the great flood, God made a covenant with Noah and his family that He would never again destroy the world with a great flood (Genesis 8:20; 9:17, ESV). God made a covenant with Abraham when He promised, “I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse, and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you” (Genesis 12:1–3, ESV). God made a covenant with the Israelites concerning their usage of the Promised Land (Exodus 19; 24, ESV). The Holy Scriptures explain the history of ancient Israel as the product of a covenant relationship between God and the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For many scholars, “A covenant is a morally informed agreement among two or more parties who commit to care for one another and protect one another’s rights” (Fischer 2016). Today the concept of covenant is found in the social contract of the U.S. constitution and the laws governing America. While people will sometimes fail to honor covenants or contracts, God will always honor His covenant promises with humanity.
Bibliography
Boucher, David and Paul Kelly. The Social Contract from Hobbes to Rawls. (Routledge Publishing, 1994)
Finnis, John. Natural Law & Natural Rights.( Oxford University Press, 2011)
Carbonneau, Thomas E. (1979). “The Implicit Teaching Of Utopian Speculations: Rousseau’s Contribution To The Natural Law Tradition.” https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/ papers.cfm?abstract_id=2763845 (accessed December 9, 2020)
Cole, G.D.H. The Social Contract and Discourses by Jean-Jacque
Evans, C. Stephen. Dictionary of Apologetics & Philosophy of Religion. (IVP Academic InterVarsity Press, 2002)
Hollis, Thomas, Two Treatises of Government (1689). (London: A. Millar et al., 1764)
Lemetti, Juhana. Historical Dictionary of Hobbes’s Philosophy. (Scarecrow Press, 2012)
Pogson, W.G. Hobbes’s Leviathan (1651). (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1909).
The Complete Works of John Locke. (Delphi Classics, 2017)