Many modern accounts of Aquinas' theory of natural law give explanatory primacy to the naturalness of the inclinations (to live, to know, etc).
For example, he might mean that it is "natural" in the extended sense that it arises from human natural inclinations (to live in communities) for the sake of human natural ends, but that it remains unfinished until a lawgiver provides it with a constitution.
Apparently swayed by a wish to avoid another change of schools, and by the boy's expressed inclination to go on living with his father, the court ruled for Anthony.
Smith clearly explains why many cognitive scientists believe this tendency is innate and then links it to another predisposition that seems "built in" to the human mind: our inclination to see living things in hierarchies, as in the "great chain of being" of medieval European Christians, with God at its perfect top, human beings above "higher" animals, and so on down to worms and plants.
But they would argue that their denial of constitutions and governments leads not to "no justice" but to the real justice inherent in the free development of man's sociality his natural inclination, when unfettered by laws, to live according to the principles and practice of mutual aid.
In addition, residents felt uncomfortable with a house tilt angle of 1° or more and even worse, the house became hard to live in if the inclination angle exceeding 2°.
Rather conveniently, we happen to live in the kind of social order that is most in tune with our natural inclinations – a capitalist free market economy.
It's natural, this inclination to want to know.
