Application Flashcards
NML with theft and lying
Theft and lying are wrong because:
Goes against the primary precept “live in society”.
Goes against the secondary precept in the 10 commandments (Exodus 20): Do not steal & lie.
Is outlawed in Divine Law as it is in the Bible.
The theory is deontological so it is never right to do something immoral even for a good reason (so stealing/lying to help others is wrong).
What are NML’s exceptions for theft and lying
Theft: Aquinas argues that in cases of extreme need (e.g. one is starving to death) the act of taking food that belongs to someone else would not be classed as theft. This is because the food becomes the property of the person in need, not the person who has enough. This is only the case in life-threatening situations – it is not theft “properly speaking” because in taking something to preserve life, “the property becomes
yours by reason of that need.”
Lying: There are some lies that Aquinas would argue are non-malicious and not immoral: An example of a lie that is not a sin is the lie that the
midwives of Egypt told: (Exodus) they allowed baby boys to live after the Pharaoh ordered the death of every first born of the Jewish
children. if one has to lie to save a life, Aquinas suggested that the best course of
action is to “keep back the truth” rather than directly lie. However, a malicious lie is always wrong.
NML view on abortion
for: To save the life of the mother in the case
of Double Effect.
against : Life begins at conception (Divine Law)
Preserve life is a primary precept.
Do not kill is a secondary precept.
Catholic tradition teaches that abortion
is always wrong.
NML view on euthanasia
For Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide:
Pain killing drugs may be administered to someone which have the accidental secondary effect of ending their life (this could be considered ‘Passive Euthanasia’).
Against Euthanasia/ AS: Self preservation is a primary precept. Divine law outlaws suicide. Catholic tradition views suicide as an unforgivable sin.
NML view on designer babies
For Designer Babies:
- Can be used to preserve life –e.g. making
a “saviour sibling.” This could even be
argued from the perspective of Double
Effect.
Against Designer Babies:
It is wrong to play God, this goes
against the primary precept worship
God.
Reproduction should be natural.
It would be wrong to raise a child
thinking it is special as it has been
designed, going against the primary
precept to educate children.
Reasons why VE is in favour of animals in blood
sports, as food, intensive farming and as organ
transplants.
Hierarchy of the souls: animals are shown to be
below humans in the hierarchy as they do not
have the ability to reason, therefore, animals
can be used by humans to reach Eudaimonia.
Aristotle himself performed scientific
experiments on animals at the academy.
Aristotle ate meat and would support others
doing this, it is likely that he would not seen
intensive farming practices as wrong because
animals are below humans in the hierarchy.
Blood sports were a common past time in
Athenian society, and it is likely that Aristotle
would therefore see no problem with this.
Reasons why VE is against the use of animals in blood
sports, as food, intensive farming and as organ
transplants.
It could be argued that some behaviours in
today’s world are seen as unvirtuous in our new
context – we would not consider those who are
cruel to animals to be good role models, so in
our society blood sports could be seen as
unvirtuous.
A truly virtuous person could be said to
consider the suffering of all beings, including
animals, as they are still sentient.
As Aristotle leaves room in the theory for
people to follow a moral teacher, it could be
argued that those who follow religious teachers
such as the Buddha would oppose these
actions.
VE for and against abortion
For Abortion:
Aristotle does not comment on the personhood of the embryo, so this could be seen as an acceptable action for those who deem the embryo to be a bundle of
non-sentient cells, rather than a fully human person.
As it is a Hybrid theory, there could be times where an abortion creates the best consequences for society overall –e.g. to allow abortions in the case of rape and
incest.
If the baby will be extremely disabled and unable to reach Eudaimonia, it could be argued to be acceptable.
Against Abortion:
Courage is a virtue, and the mother could be
seen to show courage by keeping a
pregnancy she is unprepared for.
If the embryo is a person, abortion is murder, which is outlawed in the theory.
“you are what you do” – does having an
abortion show a virtuous character?
