Natural law: chapter 1 revision guide

ethics

What does Aquinas argue?

everything has a telos, including people. Morality of an action depends on whether this is fulfilled

For natural law thinkers, how are purpose and goodness linked?

-everything/everyone should aim to fulfill their telos

-link to Aristotle’s fourth and final cause

What do Aristotle and Aquinas argue human beings have?

a unique telos

What are human’s telos for Aristotle?

-rational thought

-we share features with other creatures e.g sex or growth, but only we have the ability to reason and reflect

-by exercising our reason we FLOURISH and achieve TELOS

How did Aquinas develop Aristotle’s idea of the human telos being rational thought?

-as humans we are uniquely able to reflect on our MORAL behaviour and consider the goodness/badness of actions

-Aquinas believes the main moral rule is that we “do good and avoid evil”- synderesis rule. All other moral rules taken from this

What is the synderesis rule?

-Aquinas- moral rule that we do good and avoid evil

-all other moral rules taken from this

What did Aquinas believe there is when we reflect on our telos and understand the key rule?

-Five primary precepts/rules to follow from this.

-these are self-evident and what we are naturally inclined to pursue

What are the Five Primary precepts?

1. Preservation of innocent life

2. To reproduce

3. education

4. to live in an ordered society

5. to worship God

Explain the first primary precept: Preservation of innocent life?

-Aquinas argues we are to preserve life

-evident life is important, both our own and that of others

-natural and reasonable for a person to be concerned with “preserving its own being and… preserving human life.”

Explain the second primary precept: To reproduce?

-also rational to ensure life continues

- this is the main purpose/telos of sex

Explain the third primary precept: Education?

-especially education of the young

-humans are intellectual creatures, natural for us to learn

Explain the fourth primary precept: To live in an ordered society?

-we are social beings

-good to live in an ordered society where it’s possible to fulfill our purpose/telos

Explain the fifth and final primary precept: To worship God?

-we are spiritual beings

-we should recognise God as the source of life and live in a way that pleases him

Features of the primary precepts?

-absolute and universal

-general statements about what is good for humans- do not necessarily tell us HOW to act

- so Aquinas suggested secondary precepts were necessary

What are secondary precepts?

-more specific rules that can be deduced from the primary precepts

-e.g- primary precept of preserving life deduces killing a human is wrong

-secondary precepts have some flexibility as we must apply the fixed primary precepts to each situation

How does Aquinas view the universe?

-being created with a God-given order

-order seen in the moral law built into the universe

-argues there are four levels of law

For Aquinas, what are the four levels of law?

-Eternal Law

-Divine Law

-Natural Law

-Human Law

Explain ETERNAL LAW of Aquinas’ four tiers of law?

-law as known in the mind of God

-his knowledge of what is right/wrong- Aquinas refers to the effects of eternal law in terms of moving all things towards their end/ purpose

-God’s wisdom is reflected in his creation

-These are mortal truths that we as humans are unable to fathom

Explain DIVINE LAW of Aquinas’ four tiers of law?

-law revealed by God through the commands and teachings through revelation e.g in scripture

-includes the Ten Commandments and Jesus’ moral teachings like the Sermon on the Mount

-Aquinas primarily believes law is rational rather than revealed but he believes divine laws REVEALED by God are reasonable and that we could work them out

Explain NATURAL LAW of Aquinas’ four tiers of law?

-moral thinking that we are all able to do, whether or not we have had the divine revelation of scripture

-all humans have capacity to work out the moral rules necessary to achieve our purpose- given this capacity by God

-involves a rational reflection on our human nature, considering how we might “do good and avoid evil” and work out secondary precepts for the situations

Explain HUMAN LAW of Aquinas’ four tiers of law?

-customs and practices of society

-devised by governments/societies

-ideally should be based on what we reason from natural law

How does Aquinas see the relationship between these four laws?

-hierarchical, with all other laws relying on eternal law

Who is St Thomas Aquinas?

-born into a wealthy Italian family- became a monk

-disgusted his family- tried to kidnap him

-devoted his life to philosophy- “Summa Theologica” very influential

-declared a saint 1323

-key ideas- harmonises ideas of Aristotle : “THE philosopher” and teachings of Christianity

-sense of regularity+ order in universe influences his arguments for God and his natural law ethics

For Aquinas, how does he view his secondary precepts?

-possible applications rather than absolute rules

How does Aquinas’ secondary precepts/natural law differ from Aquinas’?

-very fixed

-e.g absolute rejection of artificial contraception as reproduction is a primary precept

-often this view of natural law criticised- too rigid/outdated

How does Aristotle view natural law?

-Aristotle views the aim of human beings as eudaimonia- fulfillment/flourishing

-our unique human telos to do with our ability to reason, makes us fully human

-Aristotle’s ethical ideas (virtue ethics) argue we have to develop good character traits to enable us to fulfill our function and reach this

What modern thinkers have developed Aristotle and Aquinas’ views on natural law?

-Robert George and John Finnis

In what way is Finnis interested in natural law?

Finnis is interested in natural law both as an ethical; theory and as a philosophy of law

How does Finnis use Aristotle’s idea of the practical human reasoning that comes from natural law?

-uses Aristotle’s idea of practical reasoning- phronesis- to suggest there are certain basic goods of human flourishing such as knowledge, play, work, aesthetic experience, friendship and spirituality

-from these, more specific rules can be put forward such as pursuing basic goods for all, desiring the common good of community and acting according to one’s conscience

What does Finnis argue about teleogical approach to ethics/natural law?

-argues although we should think about consequences, we should not think ends justify the means

Reasons Natural Law can be seen as a helpful way of making moral decisions?

-primary precepts aren’t controversial- goods and valued by all societies of present and past

-primary precepts in particular lead natural law to predominantly be an absolutist ethical theory. Means there is clarity to its judgements

-unlike other absolutists approaches to ethics, there is some flexibility in terms of applying secondary precepts+ take situations into account. However some interpreters of natural law especially in Catholicism have not been flexible

-natural law leads to belief in certain rights that exist regardless of context. The value of life, the right to education and to live in peace are seen as part of the natural order of the world

-natural law affirms the importance of reason- humans made in God’s image and possess rational capacity to work out right and wrong by observation of the world

Reasons Natural Law is unhelpful as an approach to moral decision making?

-can be argued basic goods vary far more across societies than realised. When these are taken to secondary precepts, it’s obvious there are different attitudes to the value of life, which gods should be worshipped and how many people can be involved in a marriage

-absolutist theory- natural law can appear too legalistic/fixed on obeying the rules especially when there are obvious negative outcomes. However, could say this is to do with how the theory has been interpreted rather than an issue with the theory itself

-natural law commits NATURALISTIC FALLACY of observing what happens in the world and assuming this is what must happen. Defines moral values in non-moral terms

-tension between clarity of the primary precepts and flexibility of secondary precepts. Catechism doesn’t recognise this difficulty in its claim that natural law is “universal in its approach” but its “application…varies greatly”

What does Aquinas believe about human nature?

It is fixed as we were made in Gods image. We can’t change what it means to be human

-our aim to fulfil primary precepts and that’s its right to do so is built into human nature

What is the contrast to the essentialist position?

-the existentialist view associated with Jean Paul Sartre

What is Sartres view about human beings nature?

-objects have a fixed nature but humans do not

-humans can only have a telos if made by God- he is an atheist so they don’t

What does Sartre believe about human telos and our existence?

We come into existence first then decide what our essence is- we decide our purpose or telos

What does Sartre argue human beings have a tendency to do?

-deny our freedom and behave as if we were objects

-living in bad faith

Famous example- describes a cafe waiter over exaggerating his gestures and movements “playing the role of the waiter” as if he cannot do anything else.

Sartre argues this isn’t the case- his essence isn’t fixed and he can choose a different job!

Reasons Natural Law is right to base ideas of right and wrong on telos?

-if Aquinas is right that there is an essential human nature, then there really is a good for all humans to strive towards

-while Aquinas supports telos with reason, divine command theory( argues right/wrong based on commands of God) makes similar point via revelation; the bible reveals “plans and purposes that God has for human beings” (Jeremiah 29:13)

Reasons natural law is wrong to base ideas of right and wrong of telos?

-Aquinas assumes all humans have the same purpose ; may be possible that each of us has different purposes. Aquinas himself seems to allow this in his recognition that priests called to celibacy are exempt from primary precepts and that’s of reproduction.

-extistentialists dispute whether humans have any purpose except the ones they freely choose for themselves. If god doesn’t exist, then it seems difficult to argue for objective human purpose

-similarly the scientific theory of evolution seems to suggest purpose is not a feature of the world but is rather something that human beings project onto the natural world

-the idea of telos entails that some things are natural to human beings and other things are unnatural

Features of a good act for Aquinas?

-must have a good motive-interior

-must be a good action on the outside-exterior

What is the doctrine of double effect?

-life is not always straightforward- actions can have more than one affect

Double effect doctrine describes areas where an action may produce several effects -good and bad

For Aquinas, what matters most in the double effect doctrine?

-which effect is intended

What example does Aquinas use in the double effect doctrine?

-self defence- your action of fighting off the attacker would have two effects

-1) good- saving your own life

-2)bad- killing the attacker

Aquinas would argue you didn’t do anything wrong and you aren’t responsible because you didn’t intend to kill the attacker

Abortion example for how Aquinas and other natural law followers approach the idea of double effects?

Abortion

-during pregnancy a woman is told her life is at risk to continue the pregnancy.

-Even if she and her doctors are devout catholics who believe that the foetus is a life that is sacred, an operation to save the mothers life is permitted despite how the foetus will be affected

-the doctor would carry out one action (an operation) with the intention of saving the mothers life (good effect) and the secondary effect of ending the life of the foetus( bad effect)

Euthanasia example for how Aquinas and other natural law followers would approach the idea of double effect?

Euthanasia

-doctor gives seriously ill person a large dose of pain killers as an attempt to treat them (action).

-This relieves pain (good effect) but runs risk of causing death (bad effect)

-if the person dies, the doctor has done nothing wrong according to natural law- was an unintended, though not unforeseen consequence.

-note- if the doctor intentionally harmed people the answer would be very different despite the action and consequence being identical

Reasons the double effect is a good way of justifying moral actions?

-double effect allows flexibility in an otherwise rigid moral discussion-making procedure. An action that produces both good and bad effects us permitted provided the good one is intended

-recognition of the complexity of real situations. Some absolutists e.g Kant have no answer for situations where duties clash or competing goods cannot both be achieved. Double effect allows sufficient consequential thinking into natural law to solve some of these cases

Reasons double effect is not a good way of justifying moral actions?

-idea that a bad effect is permitted if it is unintended is difficult to judge. Almost impossible to genuinely judge someone’s intention. May appear that someone was acting in self defence and that their attackers death was an accident, but only they will know. Likewise with the doctor there is no difference between the external actions of the one who wishes to relieve pain and the one who wants to kill

-similarly it is difficult to know how far to press the idea of double effect and which areas it may cover . Use of condoms with the intent of saving life where HIV is spreading has proved to be a controversial area in the rc church . There may be other areas where double effect could be applied in order to save a life or assist reproduction that could cause issues with the church

What do natural law thinkers believe creation is ordered by and orientated towards?

God and the Good

How did stoic philosophers eg Zeno and Marcus Aurelius view the world ?

-as an ordered place

-God created it and left “logos” or divine reason within it

-this spark is within each of us so the reasonable response of humans towards the ordered universe is to live an ordered life of virtuous acts of right actions

What are right actions?

Those we are able to rightly reason

What did Roman orator Cicero suggest about the natural law?

-the “right reason in accordance with nature”

-argues these law would continue to apply even if governments changed them- laws would be broadly the same regardless of where we were

What does Aristotle do with the stoic views of “right” actions and aristotles view of the prime mover?

Fuses them with Christian thought

What is the most significant aspect of people’s ability to reason?

People created in the image of God

What does the synderesis principle suggest?

-we are directed by something within us to pursue good and avoid evil- ability to achieve this good is within us if we reason correctly

What is Aquinas interesting view on moral mistakes ?

-follows Socrates belief that no one ever deliberately does a wrong action-just a reasoning error in pursuing apparent good rather than real good

apparent good?

An action that someone mistakenly thinks is a real good but they have not reasoned correctly

Real good meaning?

Actions that are actually good and consistent with moral principles of natural law

Aquinas quote on natural law?

“To the natural law belongs everything to which a man is inclined according to his nature “

Reasons there is an orientation towards the good?

-stoicism and religious thinkers are able to appeal to the ordered universe present in creation-paley’s argument on design are examples of this

-Aquinas is right that we want to live well, naturally aiming for goodness/happiness. When we miss this it is because we are unclear with what goodness is or differ about how to achieve it though our AIM is the same.

-Aquinas idea on natural law gives dignity to human beings and places faith in their ability to reason

Reasons there is no orientation towards the good?

-objection towards creations orientation towards the good is to reject the teleological view of the universe that assumes a God. Modern evolutionary views suggest the universe and life on earth are the result of chance with no goal. Dawkins- evolution is a “blind watchmaker “

-idea humans are orientated towards the good raises issue for some theologians- Augustine argues humans are fallen and affected by original sin- extends our ability to make good decisions as our will is divided. Aquinas recognises this but says the image of God gives us “ratio”/ ability to reason

-Aquinas too optimistic about what reason can achieve

-Aquinas view on real and apparent goods is naïve-seems some humans knowingly commit evil and it is mistaken to suggest they are seeking “apparent goods”. We don’t have inclination towards the good!