Natural Law
Our physical existence, at least to the extent that we are able to understand it, exists within a physical reality. Through the course of many generations of observation, experimentation, and even tragedy, we have come to understand many of the natural laws of our physical existence. These laws exist to bring order to our physical world and are independent of man’s desires or influences.
Our basic understanding of the laws of nature all began with observation. Those observations were ultimately followed by experimentation and then more observation. Through the process of observation and experimentation we have derived physical laws regarding the elements of nature and shown that they demonstrate very predictable outcomes to many events once thought the work of magic or of divine intervention.
By understanding these laws and applying them to practical use, man has been able to achieve the many wonders of engineering and modern technology that have dramatically improved our quality of life. We have overcome the limitations of gravity, have harnessed the power of electricity, fluid dynamics, magnetism, thermodynamics and sound waves. None of this was achieved by denying the laws of nature but by understanding them. It is our initial understanding of these natural laws that gave us the ability to apply them to our advantage and to ultimately improve the quality of our lives.
As nature is governed by natural laws that bring order to our world, so too is mankind governed by natural laws that when understood and followed bring order to society. Once these natural laws are understood, they foretell very predictable outcomes to various forms of human behavior and the effects these behaviors have on the larger society. Should we want to use the natural laws to our advantage in order to build a stronger more cohesive society, from which we can all benefit, we need to begin by understanding these natural laws rather than denying them, so that we can then learn how to use them to live together in peace and to create systems of government that are just. Just like in physics, this starts with observation.
Man Has Direct Control Over His Being
We begin by observing that human beings have direct control over both their minds and their bodies. Each individual has the power to will his body into any movement he desires. The process of raising your arm is simple and straightforward, it requires nothing but your will. There is no deliberation between you and some other entity, there is no application process for permission to raise your arm. The link between your will and your arm is direct and instant.
Similarly, the link between your will and the content of your thoughts are just as direct, requiring no coordination or cooperation from any outside source. You have the complete autonomy over both your mind and your body to do with either however you choose.
It is also straightforward to observe that the link between your will and your mind, or your body, does not extend beyond your own being. A few of you may doubt this and may need to take a break to conduct some experiments to test this theory, but I am confident you will discover no link between your will and any being other than yourself.
That there is no link between you and any being other than yourself is to say that you have no means through direct will to raise your friend’s arm, and neither does he or she have any means through direct will to raise your arm. Similarly, you have no direct will over the thoughts of any being other than yourself.
Of course you have several options of indirect control over other people. For instance, you could walk over to your friend, grab their hand, and raise their arm for them. However, this does not demonstrate any direct link between your will and your friends arm. You did not will any movement of your friends arm, you only willed the movement of your own body and demonstrated that physical contact is possible within this reality.
You could also ask your friend to raise his arm, and being a good sport, he may even oblige you. But this still does not demonstrate a direct link between your will and his arm. It merely demonstrates that you have both learned to communicate a common language with which you can transfer thoughts back and forth. The transfer of thought through any means of communication is not a direct link of will.
We have observed that each individual holds a direct link to the autonomy over their mind and body and that no such link exists between any two beings. We can further observe (conduct experiments if you must) that there is no means of transferring this link between your will and your being to anyone else. You cannot, willingly or unwillingly, offer any portion of your autonomy over yourself to someone else. The autonomy you hold over your being is in no way, shape, or form, transferrable. We can conclude from these observations that each individual is a completely independent being who holds exclusive autonomy over his or her being.
Man Has Unrestricted Freewill
We have observed that each individual holds a direct link between their will and their mind and body. Furthermore, we have shown that this link does not extend to any other individual and is not in any way transferrable. The next observation is that the link between one’s will and his being has no internal limitations. The autonomy each of us holds over our being is unrestricted by any means other than the external physical limitations of your body.
For example, you may have the will to fly like a bird, but yet you are physically unable to fly because your body does not meet the basic requirements of physical flight. Possessing the will of flight alone is insufficient to overcome the physical requirements of flight. However, if you refuse to accept the physical limitations of your body, the link between your will and your being exists unrestrained none the less. There is nothing stopping you from running around the neighborhood flapping your arms like wings fully expecting to take off for the skies. Sadly, there are also no internal limitations on your will that would prevent you from leaping off of your roof with the expectation of flight. (Please refrain from verifying this principle through experimentation without taking appropriate safety precautions.)
Your physical body must obey the laws of physics, it is not immune to reality. Your will however is not restrained, it is free to govern your being in any manner it chooses. If the manner in which your will governed your being adheres to the natural laws, you will fair much better than if you choose to govern yourself in conflict or denial of the natural laws. We call this unrestrained will our freewill. You have freewill to think, act, believe, or behave in any manner you desire. Physical results may be disappointing in certain circumstances. This is why an understanding of the natural laws of human nature and morality are so important, because the harm done by breaking the laws of human nature can be every bit as destructive as breaking any of the physical laws of nature, perhaps even more so.
Independence and Sole Possession of Autonomy Are Universal to Everyone
It can be further observed that each of the principles we have discussed so far apply universally to each individual. I alone posses the sole autonomy over my being, have no ability to transfer that autonomy to anyone else, or have any ability to claim any portion of someone else’s autonomy, and have unrestricted freewill. Subsequently, I am an independent individual. This statement could be just as accurately stated by anyone.
Because we each exist, and posses nontransferable independence as outlined above, that is in no way contingent upon the consent or cooperation of anyone else, we are each independent beings, with an equal right to the autonomy over ourselves. We each have freewill to act independently of the will of anyone else and no person has any means to claim any portion of our autonomy over our being. There is no person, or class of people that are immune to this natural law. This is the natural law of equality. It is a natural law not because it is founded by consent, or by majority vote, or was mandated by any person or group of people, it is a natural law because it is the observable reality of nature and is independent of the consent or cooperation of anyone.
Since there are no observed exceptions to these principles, it can be concluded that there is no person, or class of people, who can lay claim to the independence or autonomy of any other individual. All men are created equal. This is the origin of our natural equality, and it is also where our equality ends. Human beings are not immune to the laws of natural variation. We come in all different shapes and sizes and posses unique talents and desires. We are all equal in the independent autonomy we hold over ourselves and subsequently entitled to equal defense and protection of our natural rights, but the variation in our wants, desires, ambition and abilities will manifest in wide ranging outcomes. We’ll talk more about this later as that is an entire topic of its own.
There is a critical point to be made here. That is that the independence of each individual is a necessary condition of human equality. Suppose for a minute that man did not posses sole autonomy over his being. If other people, or some collective intelligence, was able to lay claim over some portion of our autonomy then we would be either in part or in whole slaved to that common intelligence. We would no longer posses freewill or sole autonomy over ourselves.
Man Must Act to Perpetuate His Life
It is evident enough that each person must act in order to perpetuate his or her life. Our bodies do not self sustain, they require nourishment and activity. We cannot survive without shelter, food and various other supplies. Each of these things requires work to build or simply possess. There is no way to survive without taking constant deliberate action.
Man cannot escape the responsibility of decision in his own life.
Since action is necessary for human life, so is decision. As stated, we have freewill in deciding whatever it is we wish, constrained only by our physical limitations. In theory, one could choose at any point to refuse a decision in any matter, but choosing not to make a decision is in itself a decision none the less and carries consequences just the same as any other decision. Since there is no conceivable scenario where man would be content, safe, and fully provisioned over the course of a lifetime, there can be no escaping the necessity of decision and action in his life.
Man cannot transfer the responsibility for his life to anyone else.
A person could of course exercise his freewill to surrender responsibility over his life to someone else, but he has no ability to cause anyone to accept this responsibility or to prevent that person from at first accepting the responsibility but then discarding it at a later time. Should an individual choose to surrender his responsibly over to someone else, who in turn accepted the responsibility, and as a result of that transfer, suffered some disaster on account of the person who accepted the responsibly (either by abandoning that responsibility or mismanaging it) the outcome would ultimately remain the responsibly of the individual who initially surrendered his responsibility. This is because it was his choice to surrender the outcome of his life to the will of someone else and in so doing chose not to take appropriate action in his life. The risk that he accepted in his decision is his dependence on someones else’s willingness and ability to provide for him.
Each Individual is Ultimately Responsible for His Own Life.
Since each individual must act in order to sustain his life, and the decisions regarding those actions, as well as his autonomy over his independent being cannot be transferred, it is the natural duty then of each individual to ensure the perpetuance and wellbeing of his own life, or to suffer the consequences. Furthermore, since this conditions of independence, the need to act on behalf of one’s own life, and the inability to transfer either independence or the need to act, is universal to all men we can conclude that the ultimate responsibility of life for every person rests solely on the individual.
Of course, none of this is to say that mankind does not share in their common aims in life, that is of self preservation and the pursuit of happiness. It is still well within our mutual best interest that each of us acts in regards to our common benefit. Refer to Why The Need For Government to recall the benefits of a collaborative society. This does not mean that we should not support each other, work together in our common interests, or to take a personal stake the lives and wellbeing of others. We absolutely should. This also doesn’t deny there are some people who through birth or tragedy lack the capacity to fully care for themselves and require help. We all require some level of help. What this is saying, is that there is a natural requirement for each of us to act in order to perpetuate our lives and that duty to act is our own responsibility.
The Natural Right To Life
Since each individual is the sole possessor of his being in that his independent autonomy cannot be transferred in any way, and that he must act on his own behalf through the natural and unalienable duty he holds to himself, it is each individual, and only that individual, who holds exclusive right to his own life.
To hold the belief that any individual does not possess exclusive right to his own life is to hold the belief that he is either capable of transferring some portion of his independence or autonomy to another, or that there exists some person capable of claiming a portion of the autonomy of another, or it is to deny the natural duty each holds to the perpetuation of his life. But, we have already observed these things are not possible. Therefore, we must conclude that all men are independent and hold exclusive right to their own life and to only their own life.
The Natural Right to Liberty
It would be absurd to recognize that man has a right to his physical existence, knowing that action is required for its perpetuance, while simultaneously denying the sole autonomy over his life from which his independence as an individual was derived. Since man has a right to exist, and uniquely possesses sole autonomy over his being, and that action is required to sustain his life, he cannot be denied this autonomy to direct his own life.
The right of individual freedom comes from the natural law of sole autonomy of over one’s life. To lay a claim over the liberty of an individual is to disregard the natural autonomy each person has been shown to possess over their own life. Since action is required of each individual to sustain their life, and that the ultimate responsibility of life is placed solely on each individual, to deny the right to liberty is to either deny the right to life, or to claim the responsibility for that person’s life. Again, we have shown that under the natural law, there is no means for any person to claim or surrender their independent autonomy. Therefore, restricting liberty is a violation of natural law.
The Natural Right to Pursue Happiness
The pursuit of happiness is an extension of the independent autonomy each individual holds over their being. As the right to life is valueless without also the right to liberty, so too the right to liberty is valueless without the right to choose the manner in which you exercise that liberty. The fact that you must act in order to perpetuate your life has already been established. The right to pursue happiness is the right to pursue the manner in which you act to improve the perpetuation of your life.
Denying the right to pursue happiness is the denial of freewill and the autonomy each holds over his mind. Since no person has the ability to choose for someone else their desires or to govern anyone else’s thoughts, neither do they have any ability to restrict their pursuit of happiness.
In Summary
In general, the rights that are inherent to us as humans all extend from the concept of our natural possession of freewill and of the sole autonomy we hold over ourselves. For instance, being the sole possessor of the autonomy over our mind gives us exclusive right to our own thoughts. The inability of anyone to lay a claim to this autonomy and thereby restrict our freewill to express these thoughts gives us exclusive right to the free expression of those thoughts, or the right to unrestricted speech. We cannot hold both an exclusive right to our own being, while also holding an obligation of that right to someone else’s possession.
Similarly, the right to private property comes from the right we each hold over our thoughts and actions. Products are the result of labor. You cannot claim the product of labor without holding a belief that you were entitled to the labor that produced it. You cannot lay any natural claim to the labor of someone else without being able to lay a claim over their freewill or of the independent autonomy each person holds over themselves since that is the source of the labor. In this regard, the denial of private property requires the acceptance of slavery which is a denial of our sole autonomy and freewill.
Man’s freewill and the independent and sole autonomy he holds over his being defines the natural rights of humans. A “human right” is only something that can be claimed without violating the freewill or independent autonomy of others. For example, we each have a right to life and to care for and protect our lives to the best of our ability. This does not include, however, the right to things such as free healthcare so long as healthcare is defined as the products and services of others. This is because you cannot hold a natural right to the service of doctors. That would be slavery. You do however have a natural right to do with any of your products or labor as you so desire. If you wish to trade your labor for money and exchange a portion of that money for the services of a willing doctor, that is well within your right.
Some people will argue at this point that things such as free healthcare is not slavery on account of the fact that doctors still get paid under “free” healthcare systems. That doctors still get paid is true, but they are paid with taxpayer dollars so this does not change the nature of the argument, it only pushes it uphill. Believing you have a natural right to a portion of the labor of each taxpayer is the same denial of freewill and independent autonomy, only this time instead of denying the doctor’s rights, you are denying the taxpayers rights. But this is a very involved topic in itself and will be the subject of another post.
The above argument is not intended to enumerate each and every natural right that a human posses, nor is it intended to distinguish every entitlement from an actual right, only to construct the basic framework for understanding the basis of a natural right.