¿Qué tipo de bien es John Finnis? Un estudio sobre el bien personal y común en «Natural Law and Natural Rights»

• Brian McCall ^[1]
  1. [1] University of Oklahoma

     University of Oklahoma

     Estados Unidos

     
• Localización: Persona y derecho: Revista de fundamentación de las Instituciones Jurídicas y de Derechos Humanos, ISSN 0211-4526, Nº. 83, 2020 (Ejemplar dedicado a: Cuarenta años de la publicación de Natural Law and Natural Rights de John Finnis [II] (José Antonio Retamar, coord.)), págs. 637-668
• Idioma: español
• DOI: 10.15581/011.83.012
• Títulos paralelos:
  • What Good is John Finnis? Assessing the Personal and Common Good in «Natural Law and Natural Rights»
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Resumen
  • español

    Natural Law and Natural Rights, de John Finnis ha tenido un impacto significativo en el campo de la filosofía del derecho, especialmente en algunos temas concretos. En alguna medida sus tesis recuperaron para el iusnaturalismo la relevancia que estos planteamientos tuvieron, al menos, durante cinco décadas. Sin embargo, dicha recuperación significó algo más que la clásica comprensión de una ley natural inclusiva de la ley positiva y de mayor espectro referencial que ésta. En el discurso académico y popular el enfoque de Finnis, sus colaboradores y discípulos constituye, de hecho, una «nueva» ley natural. En este artículo se analiza el origen y fundamento de la ley natural (la clásica y la «nueva»): en particular, el concepto de «bien» (tanto individual como común) que se asume en Natural Law and Natural Rights. La definición de este concepto y su papel en los preceptos primarios de la ley natural son fundamentales y determinantes de cara a la elaboración y desarrollo de los argumentos subsiguientes. La primera parte destaca la gran contribución del libro en el campo iusfilosófico: la defensa de la objetividad del bien. La segunda explora la comprensión de Finnis del concepto de bien y, en particular, las formas en que reinterpreta o se aparta de Tomás de Aquino y Aristóteles. La tercera parte describe cómo tales diferencias afectan a un ejercicio de comprensión del bien común.

  • English

    John Finnis’ Natural Law and Natural Rights has significantly impacted the field of general jurisprudence in important ways. Finnis’ thesis restored to some extent the place of natural law jurisprudence to more prominence than it had enjoyed for at least five decades. Yet, Finnis’ restoration was more than a resuscitation of the classical case for a natural law that was greater than and in fact included human positive law. In academic and popular discourse, the approach of Finnis and his collaborators and disciples is «new» natural law. This article focuses on the beginning and foundation of natural law (classical and «new»): the concept of «good» (both individual and common) in Natural Law and Natural Rights. The definition of this concept and its role in the primary precepts of natural law is fundamental to all future arguments over and elaborations of natural law. Part I highlights the greatest contribution of the book to the defense of natural law jurisprudence: the defense of the objectivity of the good. Part II explores Finnis’ understanding of the concept of good and, in particular, the ways in which it reinterprets or departs from Aquinas and Aristotle. Part III traces how these differences affect the work’s understanding of the common good.

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Aristotle, Politics, in The Basic Works of Aristotle, McKeon, R. (ed.), Random House Publishing, New York, 1941.
  • Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, in The Basic Works of Aristotle, McKeon, R. (ed.), Random House, New York, 1941.
  • Aquinas, T., Summa Theologicae, trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Benziger Brothers, New York, 1947.
  • Aquinas, T., De Veritate, trans. James V. McGlynn, Henry Regnery, Chicago, 1953.
  • Aquinas, T., «De Regimine Principum», in Selected Political Writings, D’Entrèves, A.P. (ed.), trans. Dawson, J.G., McMillan, New York, 1959.
  • Aquinas, T., On Charity, trans. Kendzierski, L.H., Marquette University Press, Milwaukee, 1960.
  • Aquinas, T., Commentary on the Nichomachean Ethics, trans. Litzinger, C.I., Henry Regnery Co., Chicago, 1964.
  • Cortest, L., The Disfigured Face: Traditional Natural Law and Its Encounter with Modernity, Fordham University Press, New York, 2008.
  • De Koninck, C., On the Primacy of the Common Good: Against the Personalists and The Principle of the New Order The Aquinas Review, vol. 4,...
  • Finnis, J., Aquinas: Moral, Political, and Legal Theory, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1998.
  • Finnis, J., Grounds of Law and Legal Theory: A Response, Legal Theory, vol. 13, 2007.
  • Finnis, J., Natural Law and Natural Rights, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2011.
  • Macintyre, A., Whose Justice? Which Rationality?, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN, 1988.
  • Macintyre, A., Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry: Encyclopaedia, Genealogy, and Tradition: Being Gifford Lectures Delivered in the University...
  • Macintyre, A., After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, 3rd ed., University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, 2007.
  • Mahoney, D., Natural Law and Human Rights: Toward a Recovery of Practical Reason, Notre Dame University Press, Notre Dame, 2020.
  • McCall, B., The Architecture of Law: Rebuilding Law in the Classical Tradition, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, 2018.
  • Newman, J., Foundations of Justice: A Historico-Critical Study in Thomism, Cork University Press, Cork, 1954.
  • Porter, J., Natural and Divine Law: Reclaiming the Tradition for Christian Ethics, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, MI, 1999.
  • Porter, J., Ministers of the Law: A Natural Law Theory of Legal Authority, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, MI, 2010.
  • Strauss, L., Natural Right and History, Chicago University Press, Chicago, 1953.
  • Westermann, P., The Disintegration of Natural Law Theory: Aquinas to Finnis, Brill, Leiden, 1998.