`titrebNature: a word of many meanings`/titrebOn the subject of natural law, Aristotle is the object of a strange misunderstanding. If we want to avoid it, we must return to the philosopher’s methodological principles: determine the meaning we give to words and make sure the idea expounded corresponds with the facts. In this philosophy, nature is a unique word which corresponds to different realities: five definitions are possible, including this one: nature defines the becoming of growing things. Nature is equally the departure and the conclusion of the process of growing things. It is true to say that Aristotle’s theory of nature seeks to explain a certain inner stability in the processes that characterise living creatures; but without drifting towards the fixist conception so often criticised. Man is radically different from other creatures: possessing natural life, rational life, theoretical life. We note that Aristotle does not abuse the expression “natural law”. When he speaks of man, he prefers to evoke an absence of fixity: human sciences evolve in the field of contingency. Man is not determined first and foremost by his nature. For the Stagirites, the concept of “natural law” is based on the observation of a universally accepted understanding of what is just by nature, and not of obligation. In Protreptic, nature appears to be a source of policy and good legislation. There again, nature suggests an invigorating dynamic. Nature gives to the politician the means to decide in favour of what is just and profitable.