"Natural" Laws

As I watch and cherish the Planet Earth DVD series, a lot of thoughts come into mind. First and foremost is the realization how small we are. This Earth, our home, is vast, varied and complex. One can never fully know it or realize its laws. We can never fully know all the life forms that have taken birth and live along with us here, or even understand all the forms of land and water, formed over millions of years of natural evolutions.

The best one can do is to cherish life, enjoy this phase in our birth as humans, who can consciously observe around and appreciate all this. We are just one organism in one of the species here, but yet each of us is significant. In there is life, leave your mark in some good way. Avoid extremism of any nature, nature and its laws clearly forbade. Any extreme, both good or bad, will only do harm. Know yourselves to be humans and you best peform at the optimum.

Every human needs principles, and as social beings, society needs its laws. And every country, every religion, every community, and any such social organization, has formed its laws. And one must respect the laws of the organization if one wishes to be part of it. Else one must be free to move out expressing his dissatisfaction. Humans are thinkers. It is our capability to think that has brought us to this position to rule Earth. Hence, no organization should seek to blind or obtrude the choice of the thinking man. If individual thought, opinion and decision is appreciated, practices that are incorrect will by themselves be weeded away. If more people leave the organization owing to dissatisfaction of its practices, the organization will definitely change its practices. It is blind faith, and the end justifying the means that one should rather be wary of.

But there have to be certain "human" laws if you will, that should form as a premise for any society acting as its subset. And this premise could be as simple as: Would the receiver of the action (object) be agreeable to it by the doer (subject). Or would the doer, in the place of the receiver, have accepted it. Within rational terms.

For example, a victim does not want to be killed by the murderer. So it is wrong. Likewise, no one would want to be thieved of what he has earned. So theft is wrong.

But these "human" laws aren't to supersede the laws of nature themselves. Like every person will succeed in life to levels based on his capabilities. Society cannot progress if it decides not to move ahead until every human catches up. In effect, not all will have it equal. But each will justly have what he has put effort for, and earned.

I think many democracies understand these and frame their laws around this. Hence, for example, adultery is not punishable by law because both the people involved consented. But this is not to say all laws created by every social organization (country, religion or community) have to follow the the above premise. My point is the above premise should definitely but apply to protect other humans. For example, no religion should say kill someone or steal from someone else.

But the detailed laws to run any society or group can have its influences. Of culture and history predominantly. For example, gambling would be banned in some countries. Now you may or may not agree with it. Point is, if you disagree, don't be part of that country.

The next level of thought would be: Would these laws apply to our interactions with other life forms on Earth. Would a tree want to be cut, even a crop? Would animals want to be hunted? But then, animals hunt other animals and eat plants too. That is the food chain! Thus, the premise of natural law as suggested above only applies to our interactions with other humans, and not non-humans. But man must be think and realize that greed-in the wake of not being bound the laws-could have short term benefits with long term harm to future generations, and our own survival, and hence needs to be kept in check. This again falls under the purview of the next level of laws, thus adding "thought" to culture and historical influences to the shaping of rules.

The good effects of natural laws is very clear in the functioning of what is called the "market" economy. Thus, businesses are created based on the needs and fulfill them. If another business does it better, it thrives (equivalent to the laws of nature). Businesses are not allowed to in direct action destroy another businesses property or people working there, nor to steal their product ideas (the "human" laws proposed above). And we need to keep greed (monopolies and resource-exploitation) in check (the "detailed" laws).

A thought I got today, on what natural laws ought to be. Whatever is shaped by the free will of individuals involved, should be legalized, with rules to define perimeters. Like Gambling has been, strip clubs were. Murder cannot, for the victim does not want to lose his life. So too about theft. But what about prostitution, which when legalized by countries controls its better. Thus in the natural law, wars are illegal. But how about hunting, the animal does not want to lose its life, and although I am a vegetarian by diet, understandably this philosophy does not naturally cover non-humans. Why, even nature's laws live up to the food chain.