Natural law theory bases morality on human reason and human nature. That is, we can look to the elements of nature, including human behavior, to help guide our ethical decisions. However,
philosophers interpret what is “natural” differently. Philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau held that humans are naturally compassionate and altruistic. Philosopher Thomas Hobbes regarded humans as
wholly self-interested and suspicious of one another. Philosopher John Locke believed the mind is a tabula rasa—a blank slate—at birth, and that there is no universal agreement regarding principles
perceived as innate. Human rights are primarily based on natural law. Most of us believe we have a right to be free, treated humanely, and respected as human beings; however, people do disagree on
what rights natural law accords us.
Question
What do our natures entail exactly, if anything? Do you align yourself more with Rousseau, Hobbes or Locke? Accordingly, how might we successfully base our laws on the laws of nature, if at all?
Referencing the television series Lost, what do you believe our natural rights afford us specifically in terms of actual laws? What laws might we need to re-evaluate or change, if any, to better
reflect these rights?