Thomas Aquinas and the Metaphysics of Law

William S. Brewbaker
{"title":"Thomas Aquinas and the Metaphysics of Law","authors":"William S. Brewbaker","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.898941","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite modernity's longstanding aversion to metaphysics, legal scholars are increasingly questioning whether law can be understood in isolation from wider questions about the nature of reality. This paper examines perhaps the most famous of metaphysical legal texts - Thomas Aquinas' still-widely-read Treatise on Law - with a view toward tracing the influence of Thomas' metaphysical presuppositions. This article shows that Thomas' account of human law cannot be fully understood apart from his metaphysics. Attention to Thomas' hierarchical view of reality exposes tensions between Thomas' \"top-down\" account of law and his sophisticated \"bottom-up\" observations. For example, Thomas grounds human law's authority in its foundation in the \"higher\" natural and eternal laws. On the other hand, he is well aware that many if not most legal questions involve \"determination of particulars\" - the resolution of questions that might reasonably be answered in more than one way. Thomas' metaphysics sometimes works against his inclination to give place to human freedom in the creation of law. Thomas' metaphysical approach also raises important questions for contemporary legal theory. His insistence on addressing the question of law's ontological status, for example, challenges the reductionism of much contemporary jurisprudence and provides a vocabulary for accounting for the wide variety of analytical approaches legal philosophers employ.","PeriodicalId":80402,"journal":{"name":"Alabama law review","volume":"58 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alabama law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.898941","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Despite modernity's longstanding aversion to metaphysics, legal scholars are increasingly questioning whether law can be understood in isolation from wider questions about the nature of reality. This paper examines perhaps the most famous of metaphysical legal texts - Thomas Aquinas' still-widely-read Treatise on Law - with a view toward tracing the influence of Thomas' metaphysical presuppositions. This article shows that Thomas' account of human law cannot be fully understood apart from his metaphysics. Attention to Thomas' hierarchical view of reality exposes tensions between Thomas' "top-down" account of law and his sophisticated "bottom-up" observations. For example, Thomas grounds human law's authority in its foundation in the "higher" natural and eternal laws. On the other hand, he is well aware that many if not most legal questions involve "determination of particulars" - the resolution of questions that might reasonably be answered in more than one way. Thomas' metaphysics sometimes works against his inclination to give place to human freedom in the creation of law. Thomas' metaphysical approach also raises important questions for contemporary legal theory. His insistence on addressing the question of law's ontological status, for example, challenges the reductionism of much contemporary jurisprudence and provides a vocabulary for accounting for the wide variety of analytical approaches legal philosophers employ.
托马斯·阿奎那与法的形而上学
尽管现代性长期以来对形而上学的厌恶,但法律学者越来越多地质疑,是否可以将法律与关于现实本质的更广泛的问题分开来理解。本文考察了也许是最著名的形而上法律文本——托马斯·阿奎那至今仍被广泛阅读的《法律论》——以期追踪托马斯形而上假设的影响。本文认为,要完全理解托马斯的人类法,离不开他的形而上学。对托马斯的现实等级观的关注揭示了托马斯“自上而下”的法律解释和他复杂的“自下而上”观察之间的紧张关系。例如,多马将人类律法的权威建立在“更高”的自然和永恒律法的基础上。另一方面,他很清楚,即使不是大多数法律问题,也有许多问题涉及“细节的确定”,即解决可能有多种合理答案的问题。托马斯的形而上学有时与他在法律创造中给予人类自由的倾向背道而驰。托马斯的形而上方法也为当代法律理论提出了重要问题。例如,他坚持解决法律的本体论地位问题,挑战了许多当代法律学的还原论,并为法律哲学家使用的各种分析方法提供了一个词汇表。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信