Contemporary Natural Law Jurisprudence

A cutting-edge critical overview of debates in natural law jurisprudence, pointing the way to the future of the field.

Natural law theory is a major contemporary school of philosophy of law. This Element provides a critical overview of lines of thought in this tradition. Functional arguments remain the best route to the natural law thesis. The argument from context has promise, whereas the argument from injustice and the central case method fail.Natural law theory is a major contemporary school of philosophy of law. This Element provides a critical overview of recent lines of thought in this tradition. Section 1 considers the defining claims of natural law jurisprudence, including strong and weak natural law views. Sections 2 to 5 examine four contemporary lines of natural law argument: functional arguments, the argument from context, the argument from injustice and the central case method. Functional arguments remain the oldest and best route to the natural law thesis. The argument from context also has promise, whereas the argument from injustice and the central case method fail to yield robust natural law conclusions. Section 6 reflects on the future of natural law jurisprudence. It explores a possible reframing of natural law theories, away from the prevailing emphasis on legal validity or defectiveness, and towards an understanding of law as a natural phenomenon.