The essay argues that insisting on the 'natural law' label narrows the audience and alienates allies who share moral realism but dislike the brand. It proposes treating 'natural law' as one name among many 'generic equivalents'—à la C.S. Lewis’s 'Tao'—so secular figures like Ronald Dworkin can be practical partners on shared moral claims. The point is to prioritize substance (objective moral truths) over sectarian labels to expand influence.
— Brand‑neutral framing could broaden coalitions for moral arguments in law and policy by uniting religious and secular realists under a common, non‑sectarian banner.
James R. Rogers
2025.09.02
100% relevant
Rogers’s critique of Zondervan’s Natural Law: Five Views and his use of C.S. Lewis’s 'Tao' and Ronald Dworkin as label‑agnostic exemplars.
← Back to All Ideas