This anti-rationalist approach to human affairs, for

Hayek, was the same which guided Scottish

enlightenment thinkers, such as Adam Smith, David
Hume and Adam Ferguson, to make their case for liberty.
[137]
 
For them, no one can have the knowledge necessary to
plan society, and this "natural" or "spontaneous" order of
society shows how it can efficiently "plan" bottom-up.
[138]
 Also, the idea that law is just a product of deliberate
design, denied by natural law and linked to legal
positivism, can easily generate totalitarianism: "If law is
wholly the product of deliberate design, whatever the
designer decrees to be law is just by definition and unjust
law becomes a contradiction in terms. The will of the
duly authorized legislator is then wholly unfettered and
guided solely by his concrete interests."[] 

However, a secular critique of the natural law doctrine

was stated by Pierre Charron in his De la sagesse (1601):
"The sign of a natural law must be the universal respect
in which it is held, for if there was anything that nature
had truly commanded us to do, we would undoubtedly
obey it universally: not only would every nation respect
it, but every individual. Instead there is nothing in the
world that is not subject to contradiction and dispute,
nothing that is not rejected, not just by one nation, but by
many; equally, there is nothing that is strange and (in the
opinion of many) unnatural that is not approved in many
countries, and authorized by their customs."
This idea is wrong because law cannot be just a product
of "reason": "no system of articulated law can be applied
except within a framework of generally recognized but
often unarticulated rules of justice."
Also, the idea that law is just a product of deliberate
design, denied by natural law and linked to legal
positivism, can easily generate totalitarianism