Natural Law- Ethics

What are Aristotle’s Four Causes?

1. Material cause- what something is made of

2. Efficient cause- How it was made/ who made it

3. Formal cause- what it is like/ how we can recognise it

4. Final cause- what it is for/ what its purpose is

What is Natural Law?

• The moral law of how human beings should behave

• reflect on human nature, rationally reason what leads to happiness

Why did Aristotle ask 4 causes, what is most important?

• To find an object’s essence

• Final Cause- gives the best explanation of an object

• If an item fulfils its purpose (telos), there will be EUDAIMONIA- flourishing/ happiness

Eudaimonia and human purpose

• HIGHEST human good/ ultimate AIM of life

• Deep, stable “living well”- active virtous exercise of capacities

• Fulfilling one’s potential to achieve fulfilment- living in line with reason and values

• Aquinas- can be achieved individually and societally- failure to orient towards God will cause degeneration

Aristotlean teleology

• Everything has a nature directing it towards its good end goal

• Telos- natural behavioural inclination to a thing’s good end

Aquinas on Aristotlean teleology

• Christianised the notion of everything having a nature directing to good

• God’s omnibenevolent plan for creation

• Human nature has the God given ability to reason- we can intuitively know primary precepts and apply them to moral situations

Romans 1.20

“Since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities- his eternal power and divine nature- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been amde”

• clearly evident in observation of the world- revealed to us through Creation

Romans 2- St Paul

“When Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law… they show that the requirements of the law are writtem on their hearts, their consicences also bearing witness”

Why might there be an objective human morality?

• Societal progress- e.g. civil rights, abolition

• Soldiers ‘just obeying orders’ in the Holocaust were found to be acting wrongly

• Moral claims presuppose objective morality

Stephen Pope on objective humanity

“There is widespread recognition by all but the most indifferent and cynical that the evils [of the 20th century] amount to something more than a violation of mere social customs, aesthetic taste or sentiment”

Aquinas’ 4 kinds of Law

1. Eternal Law

2. Divine Law

3. Natural Law

4. Human Law

Eternal Law

• God’s unchanging law- universal and absolute, part of God

• God’s plan, built into the nature of existence, according to his omnibenevolent nature

Divine Law

• Positive, revealed law- God’s revelation to humans in the Bible

• How God reveals his eternal law

• Corrects uncertainity and imperfection of Natural Law

• Corrects limitations of human law

Natural Law

• moral law created by God in human nature- can be discovered through reason

• Finding the eternal law through our reason

• “The rational creature’s participation in the eternal law”

• Participating in God’s wisdom through our own rationality

Human Law

• the laws humans make, should be based on divine and natural law

• The customs and practices of society, only proper if deriving from natural/ divine law

• cannot escape the imperative to conform to the natural law

Aquinas- how can we understand purpose?

1. Universe was created by God so everything has telos

2. This purpose can be understood by examining the natural world and the Bible

3. God gave humans reason & freedom, hoping they choose good (God’s purpose for them)

4. This is called natural law- rational understanding/ following of God’s purpose

5 Primary Precepts

• Preservation of Life (Defend and protect innocent human life)

• Reproduction

• Education

• Worship God

• Live in an ordered society

What are precepts?

Primary purposes in life which humans are naturally inclined to do, we can know them intuitively and will be happy if we follow them

What does Aqunias think determines right and wrong?

• Whether an action leads to humans’ ultimate purpose- God having a relationship with humans

• Good = acts in line with human purpose

Secondary precepts

• “Conclusions following closely from first principles”

• What we should or shouldn’t do to uphold primary precepts

• Specific moral laws/rules deduced with reason from fundamental moral principles

• Derived by reason, practical, can sometimes be flexible

Secondary from primary

• Preservation of Life- do not commit murder, abortion, suicide, euthanasia

• Reproduction- do not use contracecption, commit adultery, have homosexual sex

• Education- pursue knowledge, ensure children go to school

• Worship God- pray, go to church, follow the Bible

• Live in an ordered society- do not steal, follow the law, pay taxes

Exterior and interior acts

• Intention and act are both important

• Good exterior act can have a bad interior if has thr wrong intention e.g. to impress somebody

• Aquinas only values the end of God- pshysical pleasure cannot be the final end as animals can alo experience this

• Acts are intrinsically good or bad- God is glorified when we act in line with ouyr ultimate purpose of fellowship with Him

• A good exterior act with bad interior is not morally good- doesn’t glorify God

• PROBLEM- GOOD IS STILL BEING DONE, WE CAN NEVER BE FULLY SURE OF INETTIONS, SHOULDNT STOP GOOD INTENTIONS, NOT REALISTIC

Real vs apparent good

• Apparent- humanm actions that are not in pursuit of perfection- does not lead to God’s intentions for humans e.g. watching too much TV takes away from learning

• Use reason to distinguish between real and apparent goods

• Reason reveals ‘natural/cardinal’ values- prudence, temperance, fortitide, justice

• Scripture- theologuial virtues- faith, hope charity

• Real good is to develop these virtues, make them habitual

Problem of saying humans never choose evil

• Supposedly choose apparent goods which are actually bad

• Humans can purposefully and knowingly inflict evil and suffering

• Can we say there is a difference between the two? Doing something with bad consequences which draws away from God

• Problem of saying humans are naturally inclined towards good- how ca we explain repeated

What is prudence?

• Intellect/ practical reason

• Humanity is intrinsically rational- we need to look at the results of our actions in a rational way rather than intuition

• Need to look at the APPLICATION of precepts, not just formulation- Natural Law must be understoof situationally

• “The application to action, which is the goal of practical reason”

• “All people realise that it is right and good to act according to reason”

What is lex?

The letter of the law- statue law

What is ius?

• The principle of the law, not exact wording

• The ‘law’ of NML

• Rights rather than Law, not a legalistic system of precise regulations

• BUT Cath. have treated natural law as sets of regulations

• PopeFRancis used more ius

Aquinas on DDE

• “Moral acts take their character from what is intended, not from what is outside the intention, as this is accidental”

• “An act might have a good itention but still be wrong if it is not proportional to the end” e.g. using more violence than needed in self-defence

What is the Doctrine of Double Effect?

• Both intention and results must be considered

• If primary intention is to save a life, unintended bad effect not NECESSARILY unlawful

• Wrong for a doctor to give lethal drugs/ euthanasia because the intention is to kill

What are the 4 Conditions of the Doctrine of Double Effect?

1. Must not be deontologically evil- e.g. murder is, killing is not

2. Proportional- evil must not outweigh good

3. Intention must be good, bad effect must be ‘besides the intention’

4. Means-end- bad and good must be brought about imediately, otherwise a bad means is being used for a good end

Examples of DDE inadequately answering moral issues

• Allowing a woman to have an abortion if the pregnancy wll inevitably lead to the death of the mother and child

• Killing a terrorist who is about to bomb a crowd

• Ending the life of a wounded soldier begging to end the pain on a battlefield

• Sending cgildren into prostitution to feed a starving family

DDE evaluation- unbiblical?

• God’s commands are absolute, not dependent on someone’s intention

• Accept that people are not immoral for unintended consequences BUT if you can foresee a bad event then it’s not kjustified that you didn’t intend it

Hoose and McCormick’s proportionalism

• recognise the importance of reflecting on human nature to reveal moral principles and precepts

• disagree that natural law is absolutely binding

• It is acceptable to go against primary precepts if there is a proportionate reason to do so

• Invalidates DDE conditions of deontologically evil and means-end

• The only valid condition in double effect is proportionality, intention must to be act with proportionate reason

Kosovo

• 1999 women raped by Serbian soldiers given the morning after pill by the UN

• John Paul II condemned this act as abortion is an intrinsic evil

• Proportionalism more useful in providing guidance in this situation

Proportionalism- Coherence

• Moral actions are comprised of parts e.g. intention, accordance with precepts but those parts are not good or bad in themselves, only the overall act

  • response to Aquinas saying it is bad to go against precepts but can sometimes be justified in DDE- an overall good act cannot be composed of bad parts

• ‘Parts’ are factually/physically good or evil in their enabling of flourishing

• Killing a baby to save the family is an ontic (physical/factual) evil, but measured against the ontic good of saving a family, it is a morally good action

• “If we talk of morally evil elements in an act that is morally right […] we confuse the whole issue”

Proportionalism weakness- John Paul II

• John Paul II- misunderstands the required objective for ethical action

• In NML, we intentionally act on moral law through reason, and we are intuitivey designed to know these moral laws, the goal of NL is following precepts

• Proportionalism misdirects our intention towards balancing ontic goods, rather than our telos

Criticism of JPII

• a calculation of ontic good could be a part of our ultimate end

• Ontic goods allow for slourishing, aligning with our telos

• Aquinas accepted his list of primary precepts was not final- proportionalism could be a development

Proportionalism weakness

• Could collapse into utilitarianism and eadsily stray from NML?

• But still guided by precepts as they are generally the good

Proportionalism strength- decision making

• aligns with pragmatic, realistic decision making- judging both effects of an action

• A deontological approach to natural law is not compatible with the post-lapsarian ontic evil surrounding acts

• Following proportionalism aligns us with our telos by allowing flourishing

Decision making response- John Paul II

• claim of no intrinsically evil actions goes too far, an intrinsically evil act can never be acceptable

• We should instead avoid these acts even if it means sffering- early Christians ready to be martyrs

  • BUT what if this lets others suffer and die, rather than oneself? e.g. euthanasia

• Consequences in DDE matter to a certain degree

• A misunderstanding of morality- we are on earth to follow God’s moral law rather than achieve happiness- flourishing is not happiness, it is cultivating virtues which rationally order us in our actions towards our end

• Suffering from God’s moral law is a result of the fall

Cardinal Newman

“The Catholic Church holds it better for the sun and moon to drop from heaven, … for millions to die of starvation in extremest agony … than that one soul […] should commit one single venial sin”

NML Evaluation- Grotius

• Natural Law is independent of religion and defines things as good or bad by their own nature through reason

• NML would hold even if God did not exist- humans are rational and social, so moral knowledge is not confined to Xian believers

• Provided universal basis for ‘just war’- international moral reasoning so rulers can be judged by standards beyond local conventions

NML Evaluation- Finnis (secularised Natural Law)

• Version of Natural Law based on idea of ‘human flourishing’

• flourishing needs life, knowledge, play, work, frienship, religion, practical reason- objective, universal provide rational basis for decision making

• Someone e.g. deprived of leisure will not flourish

• supported by basic requirements e.g. a coherent plan of life, following conscience, pursuing goods

• We derive unchanging natural law from these goods and requirements, which we can often put into rights e.g. not to be tortured

• NML is also about the coherence of society, personal plans should not conflict with the common good which gives everyone the opportunity to pursue goods

  • BUT no basis for being objective beacuse secular

NML Strengths

• Rational, based upon practical reason

• Telos provides purpose and meaning to decisions, aimed towards thriving

• Instinctive- in line with natural intuition so can be guided by reason

• Goes beyond Bible to provide guidance e.g. 2ndary precepts provide help to moral decision making

• Autonomous through a person’s own prudence

• Absolute, more secure than moral relativism

NML Weaknesses

• Overly rigid through precepts- not adquately covered by DDE e.g. banning contraception and abortion can spread STDs, lead to the deaths of mother and children

• Contrasts with agape- Jesus broke laws for the most loving thing, limited by NML

• Overly optimistic view of human nature- does not account for original sin

• Unreliable due to dependence on autonomous decision making and reason

• Naturalistic fallacy- maybe not every sexual act should lead to procreation just because it often does

Weakness- is NML outdated?

• Cannot support moral decision making in line with contemporary social norms

Defence of NML not being outdated

Weakness- the existence of Telos

• Francis Bacon- formal and final causation are not valid scientific concepts, unlike material and efficient

• All supposed telos can be reduce to material and efficient causation (e.g. structure, forces)

• E.g. telos of a seed to grow into a bush versus changes to its structure as a result of evolution

• Telos unnecessary

• BUT- Polkinghore- physicist- science only tells the what, not the why of purpose- successful- science is limited so cannot dismiss purpose

• CCP- Dawkins- cannot just assume there is a ‘why’- “what is the colour of jealousy?”- the burden of proof- also ‘why’ could still be discovered

Weakness- universal moral (dis)agreement

• if we are all born able to know primary precepts, there should be more moral agreement- disagreement often falls along cultural lines

• Gareth Moore- our nature shaped by our culture and society- changing norms

• Social conditioning holds influence rather than NML

• Fletcher- positivism- faith rather than reason

• BUT Aquinas- an orientation to the good- still original sin, mistakes in conscience, cultural corruption- would respond to changing cultural norms

• CCP- cross-cultural morality pragmatic, wired towards survival instead of God

Eval- Barth and the role of reason

• Aquinas- perfect rational self-control destroyed by the fall but telos and our reason not destroyed- only rational beings can sin

• CP Barth- post-Fall, dangerous to rely on human reason to know anything of God or his morality- “the finite has no capacity for the infinite”

• Barth- idolatry to think what we discover thro