scholarly journals La ley moral natural según Francisco Suárez

2007 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
Francisco T. BACIERO RUIZ
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Study ◽  
Moral Law ◽  
Natural Right ◽  
Rational Nature ◽  
De Legibus ◽  
Divine Mind ◽  
Francisco Suarez ◽  
Eternal Law ◽  
The Right

Suárez undertakes systematic study of natural moral law in Book II of De legibus, which is integrally consecrated to the study of the eternal law, natural right and the right of nations. In confrontation, among others, with the thesis of Gabriel Vázquez, Suárez maintains the natural moral law is a divine obligatory law or command, which orders to do or to avoid that which is «fitting» or «unfitting» with the human rational nature. Divine Mind and Will contribute thus, each within the bounds of his own sphere, towards the promulgation of the natural moral law.

Property Rights: A Re-Examination

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. E Penner
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Property Theory ◽  
Natural Right ◽  
Kantian Theory ◽  
Bundle Of Rights ◽  
Vexed Question ◽  
The Right ◽  
Jural Relations

Ranging over a host of issues, Property Rights: A Re-Examination pinpoints and addresses a number of theoretical problems at the heart of property theory. Part 1 reconsiders and refutes the bundle of rights picture of property and the related nominalist theories of property, showing that ownership reflects a tripartite structure of title, the right to immediate, exclusive, possession, and the power to licence what would otherwise be a trespass, and to transfer ownership. Part 2 explores in detail the Hohfeldian theory of jural relations, in particular liberties and powers and Hohfeld’s concept of ‘multital’ jural relations, and shows that this theory fails to illuminate the nature of property rights, and indeed obscures much that it is vital to understand about them. Part 3 considers the form and justification of property rights, beginning with the relation an owner’s liberty to use her property and her ‘right to exclude’, with particular reference to the tort of nuisance. Next up for consideration is the Kantian theory of property rights, the deficiencies of which lead us to understand that the only natural right to things is a form of use- or usufructory-right. Part 3 concludes by addressing the ever-vexed question of property rights in land.

Christian Belief and Moral Philosophy

2020 ◽  
pp. 76-82
Author(s):  
Terence Irwin
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Old Testament ◽  
Moral Law ◽  
City Of God ◽  
Divine Grace ◽  
Ancient Ethics ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
Christian Literature ◽  
The Right ◽  
The City

Christian literature, from the New Testament onwards, pursues the main themes of ancient ethics, from the theological perspective derived from the Old Testament. Both Jewish and Christian writers defend their moral views by appeal to the natural law and natural reason that the Stoics acknowledge. The Christian Gospel does not reveal the moral law, but (1) makes us aware of how demanding it is, (2) shows us that we cannot fulfil its demands by our own unaided efforts, and (3) reveals that we can keep it through divine help that turns our free will in the right direction. These three claims underlie the Pauline and Augustinian doctrines of divine grace and human free will. Christian ethics looks forward to the ‘City of God’, which cannot be realized in human history. But it also engages with human societies in order to carry out the demands of the moral law.

scholarly journals On The Right to Private Property and Entitlement to One’s Income

2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-74
Author(s):  
Andrei Marmor
Keyword(s):  
Social Norms ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Entire System ◽  
Moral Argument ◽  
Natural Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Short Essay ◽  
Fair Assessment

In this short essay I argue that the main insight of Murphy and Nagel’s book, The Myth of Ownership, that people have no right to their pre-tax income, is not supported by their claim that the right to private property is not a natural right. The non-naturalness of the right to private property, I argue, is irrelevant to their moral argument. The plausibility of their moral conclusion derives from the thesis (which they also seem to endorse) that people have a right to the fruits of their labor, maintaining, however, that there is no possible conception, morally speaking, of what the fruits of one's labor are, independent of a system of legal and social norms that constitute the terms of fair bargaining, pricing, etc. People can only have a right to a fair assessment of the added value of their labor, and the latter cannot make any sense independent of the entire system of norms prevailing in the relevant society. I argue that this last conclusion is not affected by the nature of the right to private property.

Locke and Nozick on Property

1982 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. B. Drury
Keyword(s):  
Private Property ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Natural Right ◽  
Law Of Nature ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

In this paper I hope to show that the differences between the Lockian and Nozickian ideas regarding the foundation of private property are far greater than is generally assumed. My purpose is not to criticize Nozick, but to show that the accepted interpretation of Locke on which he relies is mistaken. In particular, I hope to show (1) that the theory of appropriation by labour is not applicable after the invention of money; and is meant to show that the right to property is based on the right to life and self-preservation, and (2) that property arrangements after the introduction of money are justified primarily by utility rather than natural right, and (3) that the conditions created by the invention of money make the ‘regulation’ of private property necessary for the preservation of mankind which is required by the law of nature.

scholarly journals The Bulls Distributing America

1892 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 81-89
Author(s):  
John Gordon
Keyword(s):  
New World ◽  
Great Difficulty ◽  
Natural Increase ◽  
The Other ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Natural Right ◽  
Tagus River ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Mind

When Columbus anchored in the Tagus River, March 5, 1493, he precipitated on Europe one of the most difficult questions with which the mind of man has ever grappled. It was this: By what title should the New World be held ? The Catholic sovereigns Ferdinand and Isabella determined to hold what their Admiral had discovered. But the Spanish lawyers found great difficulty in proving their title under the Roman law, which alone would be accepted as conclusive by the other powers, because it did not recognize the right of discovery. The Roman law recognized the acquisition of property through the operation of either the jus gentium or the jus civile? Under the jus gentium, which alone was applicable in this case, property could be acquired: ist, by occupation, occupatio; 2d, by natural increase, as land formed by seas or rivers, accessio; 3d, by transfer, traditio. The only doctrine suitable to the purposes of Spain was that of “occupation,” which some eminent Roman lawyers incorporated not in the jus gentium but in the jus natura, as affirming a natural right.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document