Formation of the idea of natural law in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome

This understanding of measure in Protagoras, Plato and other philosophers should be considered the cornerstone in the formation of rules of due, rules of human behavior, although with different assessments of this measure. From the ethical requirements regarding the attitude to wealth, honors, attitude to rulers, to other people, an understanding of good and bad actions is derived, and from here - the direction of people to the desired actions through the appropriate rules of human behavior. Plato's examples of good behavior include serving god, sacrificing to the gods, honoring sacred rites, paying a debt to our parents, hospitality, and following virtues.

Next in importance to the gods, Plato places the soul, since it is closest to man, and only after it - the body. And who does not want to refrain from what the legislator decided to consider shameful - “extremely dishonestly and abominably treats the most divine - his soul” [12, 728a]. At the head of all the benefits for people, Plato put the truth. The truth becomes a means of preventing injustice on the part of other people, because “there is only one way to avoid serious, incorrigible and even completely incorrigible injustices on the part of other people - this is to fight them, fight them off, win them over and steadily punish them” [12, 731b]. The truth also serves Plato's purpose of building an ideal state. To live truthfully is not to lie, to live honestly, sensibly, intelligently, to promote the growth of the state, to strive for charity, the greatest submission. To live truthfully is also not to commit injustice. Justice consists in giving everyone their due, but at the same time everyone should do their own thing [11, 432b-433B], poverty and wealth boundaries should be set [12, 744d-e], equality should be observed in the state, which consists in what is given to everyone in proportion to their nature, “especially to virtuous people”. Realizing that the majority will be dissatisfied with such equality, Plato suggests applying equality by drawing lots, and praying “to God and a good fate” that “they will arrange the draw according to the highest justice” [12, 757e-758a].

In the “Definitions”, justice is formulated as “the appeasement of the soul in itself and of the parts of the soul as one in relation to the other and as a whole; a resolution giving to each their own merit; an ability whereby one who possesses it preferentially chooses what seems just to them; the ability to obey the law in life; equality in cohabitation; the ability to obey the right laws” [12, 411d-e]. Plato's justice, despite the fact that it contains separate humanistic ideas (setting the line of poverty and wealth, calling for charity), is generally based on anti-humanistic principles, in particular the justification of slavery, the differentiation of classes and the strict maintenance of each person in his class, the imposition of responsibility for the fate of the state exclusively on the ruling class, the justification of actual inequality and the justification of natural privileges, the superiority of collectivism over individualism, the humiliation of women. The ethical assessment of a person's attitude to moral actions turns into criteria that determine the degree of severity of these actions and punishment for them, retribution, suffering that accompanies injustice (for example, Plato distinguishes cases when a person becomes unfair by their own or not by their own will, when a person can be corrected or not). Depending on this attitude, Plato also suggests appropriate “purification”, in other words, punishment. When issuing appropriate laws, Plato emphasized, the legislator should use conviction and force to achieve their goal [12, 722c].

Plato's legislation totally interferes in all relations, leaving nothing private. These include the state decreeing marriage and the communion of wives and children, the abolition of private property, the introduction of caesura, and strict regulation of the arts. The law is elevated to the absolute and becomes a means of eradicating all the imperfection of human essence, the measure of human pleasure and suffering for the sake of building an ideal state. Realizing that in many cases it will be difficult for the legislator to regulate such relations, he still encourages the legislator to show skill and not stop and look for adequate legislative means to regulate them. This desire for an ideal state becomes so dominant, absolute, that for its sake Plato declares the need for heavy punishments, up to death, to all “ungodly” who “deny the existence of the gods”, the sanctity of sacrifices, sophists. For the most serious crimes of incorrigible criminals - death or exile, for speaking out against the haves - expulsion or resettlement [12, 735e]. It is difficult to call the justification for this rigid approach the fact that Plato's attitude to the role of the state, as well as the law in society, to the assessment of slavery, the attitude towards women also lies in the plane of the foundations that prevailed in Greece at that time. Numerous external threats and wars, in which Ancient Greece was forced to get involved, predetermined the needs of national cohesion and therefore everything that did not work for these needs, and this undoubtedly belonged to the occupation of rhetoric, philosophy, ethics, quite often caused irritation among the Athenian slave authorities and the conservative part of society and accusations of freethinking. There are known cases of strict liability for disbelief or disrespect for the gods recognized by the state, which occurred with Protagoras, Anaxagoras and Diagoras of Melos, Socrates was even executed for educating young people in the spirit of “disrespect for tradition” and existing rules of conduct, and Seneca - forced to suicide.

Aristotle's Teaching and His Idea of Natural Law

The idea of natural law is also given a certain place in the works of Aristotle (384-322 BC), who was a disciple of Plato. Considering the concept of justice, Aristotle distinguishes between natural and legalized law: “State justice is partly natural..., and partly legalized.... It is natural if it has the same power everywhere and does not depend on recognition or non-recognition”. [49, 1134b, 18-35, 1135, 1-7]. These arguments of Aristotle gave reason to some scientists to believe that for him there is no natural law, since immutability disappears as a criterion of naturalness. Thus, when Aristotle answers the question of “whether it is harmful or useful for the state to change the ancestral laws, even when some law turns out to be better,” he argues that “people do not strive for what is sanctified by ancestral traditions, but for what is happiness in itself'. Therefore, “written laws should not be left unchanged. Both in the rest of the arts and in the state system, it is impossible to present everything perfectly. It is necessary to present the laws in a general form, but human actions bear the imprint of the individual. It follows that some laws have to be changed from time to time”. However, for Aristotle, natural, human customs are important, which have the form of parental attitudes (patrioi nomoi), unwritten laws (agraphos nomos), unwritten laws, and their meaning lies in the fact that “the law will not have any weight if it does not force obedience to existing customs”, and therefore the matter of changing the laws “should be decided with the greatest care” [8, 1269a], for “when changing the law leads to a slight improvement or, conversely, when it is already easy to violate the existing law, causing harm, then, of course, it is better to endure certain mistakes of legislators or officials, for there will be not so much benefit when the law is amended as harm from a learned habit of disobeying the existing authorities” [8, 1269a]. From these fragments, it may seem that Aristotle speaks only of the natural in the sense of ancestral customs, which should be respected, treated with caution, but which can change if necessary. A deeper analysis of his positions shows that progressive ideas of equality were shared to a certain extent by Aristotle.

For Aristotle, law is something that serves the common good. Joining the opinion of all, Aristotle argues that law is a certain equality (and, according to Democrats, is identical to equality), that “concerns the individual” and that “equals should have equally” [8, 1282b]. Personal differences (physical data, skin color, etc.) do not play any role, although the “measure in claims (for a larger or smaller share of political rights)” should be those components without which the state cannot exist. However, equality in Aristotle is not for everyone, and above all, not for slaves, because slavery was common at that time in Ancient Greece. It would seem that he departs from Plato's position in this respect, arguing that 'the very power of the master over the slave is unnatural; for by nature there is no distinction, only by law one is a slave, the other is free. Therefore, the power of the master over the slave, based on arbitrariness, is unfair” [8, 1253a]. After all, who “naturally does not belong to himself, but to another person - he, although a person, is by nature a slave”. But in the end, Aristotle justifies the existing state of slavery, since “domination and subordination are not only necessary, but also useful, and from birth some beings have differences: some are intended for domination, others for submission” [8, 1254a]. Therefore, “one by nature should rule, the other - to obey, and it is to those who are endowed by nature with power - are destined to be masters” [8, 1255c]. Therefore, even virtues such as modesty, bravery, or justice are necessary for a slave only to the extent that “their arbitrariness or lethargy does not manifest itself in the work they perform” [8, 1259b].

Aristotle analyzed monarchy, oligarchy and democracy as possible forms of polity in terms of which state is suitable for which form of polity and how they should be arranged, without determining which is best. At the same time, he pointed out the need to take measures to preserve the existing structure, “to try to protect the state, protecting, on the one hand, from those factors that destroy it, and on the other - to issue such laws, written and unwritten, that would contain orders that especially contribute to the preservation of the state structure” which can ensure the state's longest existence”. Equality, according to Aristotle, finds a specific manifestation in democratic states, where there is the supreme power of the decisions of the people, and where the main basis of the democratic system is freedom, which is based on the principles of equality. In a democracy there must be “first of all the free status of slaves, women and children - to the extent, of course, that it is not considered harmful as well as giving everyone the freedom to live as he pleases and without fear” [8, 1319c].

However, despite the fact that democracy, according to Aristotle, had many vices, including the threat of demagoguery, the misinterpretation of freedom as the right to do what one wants and the desire not to obey anyone, his attitude to democracy looks more positive, comparing with Plato's, where “tyranny arises from no other structure, but only from democracy, in other words, from extreme freedom arises the greatest and wildest captivity” [11, vol. 3, 564a], for although “in a democratic state the common idea is that freedom is above all, and that only in such a state is it appropriate for a person to live free by nature”, but “the insatiable aspiration of one and contempt for all others distorts this system and prepares the need for tyranny” [11, 562c] and “when a tyrant appears, he grows out of this root - that is, from the position of a people's deputy” [11, 365d].

Philosophical ideas of equality, human nature, its role and place in nature prepared the ground for the justification of the idea of natural law by the stoicism school (ca. 300 BC). The law of nature was conceived by the Stoics as independent of positive law, and nature itself as a psychophysical or only physical structure of man. It was the Stoics who formulated several different concepts of natural law, including naturalistic - cosmological, theological and rational [50, p. 10-11]. The idea of natural law has long developed in the form of absolute natural law, based on the belief in the existence of general and unchangeable laws of world life and human relations. It was believed that every living being has natural properties that inevitably manifest themselves in their behavior, and the natural law is an unchangeable and universal ethical or legal norm of human behavior. Absolute natural law got its ideas from the metaphysical perception of world life, the atomism of Democritus, and the absolute justice of Aristotle. It was based on relativism, sensualism, practicality, and anthropology. The natural law teaching of this period has an individualistic, atomistic and mechanistic character.

However, even in the time of Chrysippus, the idea of a fundamental difference between human nature and nature as such, the existence of an immutable law of nature (Lex Naturale) in the form of common sense, equality of all people regardless of wealth and slavery as contrary to human nature, the need to recognize human rights law to preserve human dignity.

The Influence of the Natural Law Ideas of Ancient Greece on the Development of Roman Law

The natural law ideas of the philosophers of Ancient Greece, not being implemented in practice in Greece, had a huge impact on the development of Roman law after the absorption of all state entities that emerged from the Empire of Alexander the Great by the Roman state from the middle of the second century BC. A significant role in the reception of the doctrine of natural law was played by the Scipio group, which included the Greeks Panaetius of Rhodes, Polybius and Roman aristocrats led by Scipio Aemilianus. Being somewhat modified by Panethius, the doctrine of Stoicism on natural law was inculcated on Roman soil, based on reason as the law for all people, their equality, albeit a certain inevitable difference in states, ranks and natural abilities, the recognition of a certain minimum of rights for people as a condition of preserving human dignity [32, p. 158-159]. This is clearly traced in the works of Seneca (4-65 ad), one of the most prominent representatives of late Roman stoicism, an exponent of the spirit of the New Stoic (Empire), who saw the main purpose of the Stoics, who “were removed from public affairs... to improve one's life and create legal bases for the human race” [15, p. 71]. Seneca emphasized the equality of the nature of all people “a slave is a person equal in nature to other people; the soul of a slave contains the same principles of pride, honor, courage, generosity that are given to other human beings, whatever their social position” [4, p. 737], the unity of human nature. Defining the essence of human duty, Seneca emphasized: “Nature brought us into the world related to each other, because from the same principles it created us, for the same purpose it appointed us. She put mutual love into us, encouraged us to communicate. She determined what is right and just; by her command, the one who does evil is more unhappy than the one who suffers evil; by her command, a person is ready to lend a helping hand to another person. Let this verse be in our hearts and on our lips: nothing human is alien to me, to man” [15, p. 408-409].

Polybius, for his part, supplemented the teachings of the Stoics with the idea of the essence of the state, which should be based on justice, a mixed form of government with monarchical, aristocratic and democratic factors based on the principles of stable balance and mutual restraint (the right of veto) [14, p. 159]. The introduction of the ideas of stoicism into Roman law led to them being distinguished along with FAS - Godgiven, original law and such types of law as JUS GENTIUM (right for all the peoples known to Rome), JUS CIVILE (from civitas - city), JUS PUBLICUM (law in relation to management that was religious in nature), JUS PRIVATUM (law in relation to property and family relations), as well as JUS NATURALE - natural law. Moreover, such a right was considered a directly valid right.

Cicero in his work “Republic” concentrated on the essence of the then understanding of natural law, first defining this concept: “In fact, there is one true law, namely - common sense, which in accordance with nature applies to all people, is unchanging and eternal (from A.Z). By its commands, this law encourages people to fulfill their duties, and by its prohibitions, it keeps them from doing evil. His commands and prohibitions always have an impact on good people, but they have no power over evil ones. The deprivation of this law by human legislation is certainly, from the moral side, erroneous, the restriction of its operation is unacceptable, and the complete abolition is impossible” [16, p. 270].

In real life, human rights in Roman law are considered as privileges associated with rank, which are not personal, but collective in nature, designed to ensure the proper performance of functions that are assigned to the individual by society. Human rights are inseparable from responsibilities or services, and responsibilities are not imposed by the state, but help people realize their potential. The duty of the state was not to ensure and protect individual rights, but to assist in meeting life needs, providing certain services to members of society [50, p. 75, 80]. There was no concept of legal capacity for voluntary action, human rights were not recognized as rights in the legal sense, which continued until the end of the Middle Ages [51, p. 34]. The perception of man as an inviolable bearer of inalienable and sacred rights in ancient times has not yet occurred [52, p. 59-60].

CONCLUSIONS

The crystallization of natural law ideas in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome had several stages. Important achievements of Greek philosophers of the pre-Socratic period was the development of the foundations of the theory of knowledge, which was used to explain the cosmological model of the universe, substantiating the idea of the existence of a universal logos, the law of nature, uniform for the natural and social environment, where man, as a “natural” being, was not known separately from nature. The eternal Natural law was not established by people, because it was based on the divine mind and its power and was the law of justice and law inherent in nature and society. It was not evaluated as good or evil, due to its objective nature, and therefore its observance was considered true and wise.

The development of humanitarian knowledge, the formation of a secular system of morality and ethics, the study of the essence of man contributed to the distinction between human and natural law, the further development of ideas of natural law, namely recognition of the equality of all people, the prohibition of discrimination based on origin, the requirement of morality in human behaviour. Sophists were among the first on the basis of the distinction between natural and human law, which may contradict nature, began to recognize the equality of all in nature, denied slavery and traditional notions of the “naturalness” of nobility by origin. The main contribution to the understanding of natural law (jus naturale) was made by the Stoics, who proved that it is based on the fundamental difference between nature and human nature, on the understanding of the place and role of man in nature, on the existence of the unchangeable law of nature (lex naturale) in the form of the power of reason, common sense, which demand justice in the form of equality of people regardless of wealth, the recognition of slavery as contrary to human nature, the recognition by law of human rights to preserve human dignity. These humanistic and human-centered ideas were used to study the essence, nature and justice of the state at that time, to distinguish between the concepts of natural and legalized law and were also used as criteria for evaluating written laws.

Progressive natural and legal ideas of the philosophers of ancient Greece, not being implemented in the homeland, from the middle of the second century BC were adopted, developed jointly by Roman Greeks and philosophers and implemented in Roman law as directly applicable law (jus naturale), along with other types of Roman law, as a rational law of common sense, consistent with the moral principles of society, immutable and eternal natural law.

REFERENCES

1. Russell, B. (1998). Wisdom of the West: A historical survey of Western philosophy in its social and political setting. Moscow: Respublika.

2. Anthology of World Philosophy: In 4 vol. (Vol. 1, ch.1). (1969). Moscow: AN SSSR: Mysl.

3. Diogenes Laertius. (1986). About the life, teachings and sayings of famous philosophers. Moscow: Mysl.

4. Anthology of World Philosophy: Antiquity. (2001). Minsk: Harvest.

5. Ancient philosophers. (1935). Moscow: Industrialnaja Moskva.

6. Pendrick, G. (2002). Antiphon, of Athens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

7. Losev, A.F., & Asmus, V.F. (1990). Plato. Collected writings: In 4 vol. (Vol. 1). Moscow: Mysl.

8. Aristotle. (2005). Politics. Kyiv: Osnovy.

9. Lurie, S. (1970). Democritus. Saint Peterburg: Nauka.

10. Nersesyants, V. (1996). Socrates. Moscow: INFRA-M-NORMA.

11. Losev, A.F., & Asmus, V.F. (1994). Plato. Collected writings: In 4 vol. (Vol. 3). Moscow: Mysl.

12. Losev, A.F., & Asmus V.F. (1994). Plato. Collected writings: In 4 vol. (Vol. 4). Moscow: Mysl.

13. Kislyuk, O. (Ed.). (2000). Aristotle. politics. Vol. 2. Kyiv: Osnovy.

14. Polybius. (2004). General history. Moscow: OLMA-PRESS Invest.

15. Seneca, L.A. (2017). Epistolarum moralium adLucilium. Leningrad: Apriori.

16. Barham, F. (1842). The political works of Marcus Tullius Cicero: Comprising his treatise on the commonwealth; and his treatise on the laws (Vol. 1). London: Edmund Spettigue.

17. Grotius, H. (1994). On the law of war and peace. Moscow: Ladomir.

18. Holovatyj, S., Koziubra, M., & Syroid, O. (2008). Anthology of liberalism: Political and legal doctrines and the rule of law. Kyiv: Knyhy dlia biznesu.

19. Dnistryansky, S. (2002). General science of law and politics. In Yu.S. Shemshuchenko (Ed.), Anthology of Ukrainian legal thought: In 6 vol. (Vol. 1). Kyiv: Vydavnychyj Dim Yurydychna knyha.

20. Palienko, N. (1908). The doctrine of the essence of law and legal coherence of the state. Kharkiv: Zilberg and S.

21. Novgorodtsev, P.I. (2011). Political ideals of the Ancient and New World. Moscow: Direkt- Media.

22. Novgorodtsev, P.I. (2011). Introduction to the philosophy of law: The crisis of modern legal consciousness. Moscow: Direkt-Media.

23. Taranovsky, F.V. (1998). Teaching about natural law. In Yu.S. Shemshuchenko (Ed.), Academic legal thought. Kyiv: ³ï Jure.

24. Chetvernin, V.A. (1988). Modern concepts of natural law. Moscow: Nauka.

25. Nersesyants, V. (1997). Philosophy of law. Moscow: Norma.

26. Law of Ukraine. 2021. No.1.

27. Krasovsky, K.Yu. (2021). Natural human rights in Ukrainian constitutionalism. (Candidate thesis, University “KROK”, Kyiv, Ukraine).

28. Bix, B. (2002). Natural law: The modern tradition. In J. Coleman, S. Shapiro (Eds.), The Oxford handbook ofjurisprudence and philosophy of law (pp. 61-103). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

29. Dworkin, R. (2012). Keynote speech. The rule of law. Conference European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) on “the Rule of Law as a practical concept” London: Lancaster House.

30. Dworkin, R. (2020) Empire of law. Moscow: Institut Gajdara.

31. Llojd, D. (2002). The idea of law. Moscow: JuGONA.

32. Popper, K. (1994). The open society and its enemies (Vol. 1). Kyiv: Osnovy.

33. Fuller, L. (1999). Anatomy of law. Kyiv: Sfera.

34. Novgorodtsev, P. (1896). Historical school of lawyers, its origin and fate: The experience of characterizing the foundations of the Savigny school in their consistent development. Moscow: Universitetskaya tipografiya.

35. Nientiedt, D. (2021). Hayek's treatment of legal positivism. European Journal of Law and Economics, 51, 563-576.

36. Crowe, J. (2016). Natural law theories. Philosophy Compass, 11(2), 91-101. doi: 10.1111/phc3.12315.

37. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (2008, Devember). Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_015tfText.

38. Stevenson, A. (2020). Conceptions of law in classical Athens. Retrieved from https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/302759.

39. Contreras Pelaez, F.J. (2013). The threads of natural law: Unravelling a philosophical tradition. Dordrecht; New York: Springer.

40. Kar, R.B. (2012). Western legal prehistory: Reconstructing the hidden origins of western law and civilization. University of Illinois Llaw Review, 5, 1499-1702.

41. Zajadlo, J. (2020). The concept of nomos - some remarks. The Critique of Law. Independent Legal Studies, 12(3), 143-161.

42. Van den Berge, L. (2019). Law, king of all: Schmitt, Agamben, Pindar. Law and Humanities, 13(2), 198-222.

43. Canevaro, M. (2017). The rule of law as the measure of political legitimacy in the Greek city states. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 9, 211-236.

44. O'Connor, J.D. (2021). Natural law and ethical non-naturalism. Studies in Christian Ethics, 34(2), 190-208. doi: 10.1177/0953946820962893.

45. Atkins, J.W. (2015). Zeno's republic, Plato's laws, and the early development of stoic natural law theory. Polis: The Journal for Ancient Greek Political Thought, 32(1), 166-190.

46. Avetisyan, A. (Ed.). (1955). Ancient philosophers (evidence, fragments and texts). Kyiv: Taras Shevchenko national University of Kyiv.

47. Kostenko, O. (2020). In the light of social naturalism. Kyiv: Palivoda A.V.

48. Sebine, G., & Thorson, T. (1997). History of political thinking. Kyiv: Osnovy.

49. Aristotle. (2002). Nicomachean ethics. Kyiv: AQUILON-PLUS.

50. Maslak, O. (2010). Idea of natural law in Western philosophical traditions (social and philosophical analysis) (Candidate thesis, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine).

51. Shevchuk, S. (2002). Equal precedent law on human rights. Kyiv: Referat.

52. Holovatyi, S. (2016). About human rights. Kyiv: Dukh i Litera.

Ðàçìåùåíî íà Allbest.ru