The Cataract Of Natural Law

The Pouring Out Of Moral Absolutes To All

I have traveled extensively throughout many parts of the world dialoguing on different topics in colleges, organizations, with tribal kings and chiefs, a few prominent Government officials, churches of all kinds and varieties of faith bringing humanitarian aid to reduce indignities brought on humanity in Asia, China, Central America, Mexico, Africa, Europe and South America.

While visiting these regions of the world, it is my habit to consult with academia, everyday folk and a host of others for educating myself. The canopy of truth I witnessed around the world, were the benevolent kindnesses that I beheld and the evils I witnessed done to and against one another. These acts of generosity come from the heart. Evil comes from the heart as well. Altogether people know that murder is murder whether it is with the Lisu Indians on the border of Tibet, whom I stayed with for a week, or in Malibu with the rich and famous. Universal moral absolutes are not the same as mores, customs or taboos. They can reflect universal moral absolutes, which they should, but sadly that is not the case many times.

The first, self-evident precept of the natural law is that “good is to be done and pursued, and evil is to be avoided.[1] If we recognize Universals it is the beginning of being provident both for ourselves and for others. Wherefore we have a share of Eternal Reason, whereby we have a natural inclination to proper acts and ends. An example of how this plays out practically is seen by the fact that if corporations were to write their corporate policies to reflect Universals instead of reflecting special interest groups or lobbyists desires, then, the raping of the rain forests, the dumping of pollutants in our rivers, the unmanaged killing of wildlife would be greatly curtailed overnight.

Moral absolutes are not an invention of anyone or from any organization. It is a God thing that no one can claim as their own. It rests in the origins of our Creator.

Plato, who is accredited for the first academy for reflective thought and education in wisdom said, “The Good was beyond existence.” Platonic, Aristotelian, Stoic, Christian, and Oriental alike have this in common, they have known there are some attitudes acceptable and others are not. As the king governs by his executive, so Reason in man must rule the mere appetites by means of the ‘spirited element’.[2]

In Plato’s Law, Book One we have a dialogue between an Athenian and a person by the name of Cleinias. Athenian: “But, whereas the animals have no perception of order or disorder in their movements, that is, of rhythm or harmony, as they are called, to us, the Gods, who, as we say, have been appointed to be our companions in the dance, have given the pleasurable sense of harmony and rhythm; and so they stir us into life, and we follow them, joining hands together in dances and songs; and these they call choruses, which is a term naturally expressive of cheerfulness. Shall we begin, then, with the acknowledgment that education is first given through Apollo and the Muses?[3] What do you say?”[4] CLEINIAS: “I assent.”

Two points I find interesting, peoples who deny moral absolutes, are absolutely sure, but are always screaming for justice. This is the kind of loopy thinking being taught in much of our schools, not all, thank goodness.

These two conflicting worldviews can be found in professional circles as well, for instance, the Isaac Newton Chair at Cambridge has been held by several famous individuals. Isaac Newton, whom the Chair gets its name, was the first chairman who was a sincere believer in God and universals. Recently, Stephen Hawking held this chair, who believes in a mindless unguided process for the meaning of life. The individual before him was Sir James Lighthill who believed in universals and God. We see here two worldviews in conflict in academia. One worldview is an open system (universals) the other a closed system (a mindless unguided process). Scientists who hold to a closed system are limited in their research. There is much in life that is beyond the five senses. Observable truth such as love cannot be verified by the methods of science. Scientists discover the existence of phenomena not its origins. Isaac Newton proved gravity and others have contributed to our understanding of it, but they still don’t know what it is. I thank God for our scientists whatever their worldview is for their discoveries have helped humanity. However, for the meaning of life, they that hold a worldview of a closed system have exempted themselves from explaining the meaning of life. They themselves admit to this. Just think, a mindless unguided process has created a conflict of two worldviews, to those of you that believe in a closed system, you are opposing your mindless unguided process it has created. Those who hold to an open system understand the conflict as it lies in the heart of choice.

This can be said of all generations going back to the beginning of humanity. We westerners call Universal moral absolutes, Natural Law, but it is called by many different names throughout the ancient world. For example, Taoism is a name for moral absolutes in China. There are different names for universals throughout ancient civilizations’ that is recorded.

The following two paragraphs are from my soon to be released book titled, The Clash of Two Worldviews: “The interest of classical philosophers is finding the wisdom to cultivate the seed of natural law in our hearts to make human relationships nobler. Without natural law how can philosophers make statements about life? There has to be a starting point of basic truths about humanity such as, universals for reason to exist. Diogenes is credited as the first to popularize “that a statement is that which sets forth what a thing was or is.”[5] It is statements based on that which has always been there. That which has always been assumed need not prove itself, for those who wish to explain it away into nothingness, the burden of proof is upon them. Good Luck.

“How can reason or the justification for a meaningful life be established from nothing? Of course, if we keep going around this merry-go round, to make sense out of life from nothing, such as much of the materialistic intelligentsia are attempting to do, they end up back at the same starting point of nothingness which leads to meaninglessness.” Many prominent scientists admit to the fact they don’t know the meaning of life. Why? To many of them, evolution is nothing more than a mindless unguided process. Well I am not going to put my trust in that explanation for life. I sure am glad my computer is not a mindless unguided process. Choose this day to put your trust in, a mindless unguided process or the Eternal God. No skin off my nose if you want to put your faith in a mindless unguided process.

[1] Rice, Charles (2011-05-02). 50 Questions On The Natural Law (Kindle Location 443).

[2] And because our approvals and disapprovals are thus recognitions of objective value or responses to an objective order…   Lewis, C.S. “The Abolition of Man” (Kindle Locations 175-176). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

[3] Goddess of art

[4]The Complete Works of Plato: [Annotated] (Kindle Locations 12601-12604). Latus ePublishing. Kindle Edition.

[5] Laertius, Diogenes “Lives Of Eminent Philosophers” Volume Two: Translated by R.D. Hicks. Publisher: Harvard University Press, Cambridge Massachusetts ed. 2005 Pg 5