232
PARTISAN REVIEW
of natural law is
necessary.
In other words, the philosopher who
offers the theory of understanding outlined above can at least assume
that the man he is trying to persuade understands
some
words, and
after having found out what those words are, the philosopher may
begin to crank his machines and grind out his universals in order
to "explain" how the understanding the man has is possible. But a
theorist of natural law will frequently have to face people who don't
believe that there are self-evident moral principles to begin with.
How can he get the machinery rolling then? Where can he begin?
What premises can the theorist of natural law start with? Surely it
is
not self-evident that
there are
self-evident principles of natural
law and therefore we must be shown that there are.
It may be said in reply that the theorist of natural law
can
deal with the man who has not quite made up
his
mind, the man
who is at most doubtful about whether there are self-evident prin–
ciples of morality. But this
is
par excellence
a situation in which the
philosopher of natural law appeals to things which are at least as
dubious and at least as obscure as that which is to be defended or
explained. Does Lippmann suppose that he is likely to persuade such
a doubtful man that there are essences which
if
properly unpacked
make the truth of moral principles evident? Even if he were to ac–
complish the first bit of required persuasion-that is to say, even if
the public should be persuaded of the existence of essences-Lipp–
mann will fail to show them that the principles of political morality
are self-evident statements about men in which, as Aquinas says,
"the predicate is contained in the notion of the subject," or logically
deducible therefrom. We know that Locke pleaded old age when he
was asked to do this by his correspondent Molyneux, and there
is
a very touching letter to Molyneux in which Locke writes:
The Gospel contains so perfect a body of Ethics that reason may
be excused from that inquiry, since she may find man's duty clearer
and easier in revelation than in herself. This is the excuse of a man
who, having a sufficient rule of his actions, is content therewith, and
thinks he may employ the little time and strength he has in other re–
searches wherein he is more in the dark.
8.
Ethics without Essences.
Finally we must ask ourselves about
the man who
does
believe that there are certain self-evident principles
