Villey traced the origin of "rights talk" (specifically the notion of ius as a subjective power or right of an individual) to the 14th-century nominalist theology of William of Ockham. "Deformed" Tradition: He contended that while this development stemmed from Christian thought, it was a "deformed" or "aberrant" variety. He argued that it abandoned the objective, cosmic justice of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas—where law is an objective, fair, and orderly arrangement of things—in favor of subjective, individualistic "rights". A "Deformed" Variety: Villey believed these rights were "unreal, contradictory
Yes, this accurately represents the views of French legal philosopher
Michel Villey (1914–1988). Villey, a leading 20th-century proponent of natural law (specifically a Thomist-Aristotelian approach), argued that the modern concept of subjective rights (droits de l'homme) was a perversion of classical and Christian thought. Here are the key points of his argument:
- Derivation from Late Medieval Christianity: Villey traced the origin of "rights talk" (specifically the notion of ius as a subjective power or right of an individual) to the 14th-century nominalist theology of William of Ockham.
- "Deformed" Tradition: He contended that while this development stemmed from Christian thought, it was a "deformed" or "aberrant" variety. He argued that it abandoned the objective, cosmic justice of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas—where law is an objective, fair, and orderly arrangement of things—in favor of subjective, individualistic "rights".
- A "Deformed" Variety: Villey believed these rights were "unreal, contradictory, and not determinate enough to be capable of adjudication". He associated this shift with nominalism, arguing it separated the legal from the ethical and led to modern legal positivism, which he strongly opposed.
Villey’s work is often contrasted with that of Brian Tierney, who traced the origins of rights to earlier, 12th-century canonists.
Comments