Natural Law Flashcards
Who argues for Telos.. and why we are unique
Aquinas and Aristotle
We share many things in common with creatures: to grow, sex, eating, feeling emotions. We are unique in having the ability to reason and reflect and exercise our reason
Synderesis
The innate principle or natural disposition directing a person towards good and away from evil
How does reason go with telos
In exercising our reason we are flourishing and achieving our telos
‘Do good and avoid evil’
Main moral rule - Synderesis, humans can consider whether things are good or bad all other moral rules come from this
5 primary precepts
Preservation of innocent life
To reproduce
To educate
To live in an ordered society
To worship God
Preservation of innocent life
Life’s importance is evident, therefore a person should be concerned with preserving its own being and human lives
To reproduce
Continuation of human life - main purpose of sexual intercourse
Education
Especially for the young, humans are intelligent - therefore it’s natural for us to learn
Live in an ordered society
We are social beings and therefore it is good to live in an ordered society where it is possible to fulfil our purpose
To worship God
We are also spiritual beings and we should recognise God as the source of life live in a way that pleases him
Are the primary precepts absolute and universal
Yes, they are general statements about what is good for humans - they do not necessarily tell us exactly how to act
What are secondary precepts
More specific rules that can be deduced from the primary precepts. For example, if preservation of life is a primary precepts, then we can deduce that killing a fellow human is wrong.
Which precepts are flexible?
Secondary precepts as we have to consider how the primary precepts are to be applied in each situation, however primary precepts are fixed
The four tiers of law
The eternal law
The divine law
Natural law
Human law
What’s the four tiers of law - explanation
Aquinas sees the universe as being created with a God-given order. This order is also seen in the moral law that is built into the universe
The eternal law
The law as known in the mind of God. His knowledge of right and wrong. Eternal law - moving all things towards their end and purpose. God’s wisdom reflected by his creation
The divine law
Refers to the law revealed by God through his commands and scriptures -> Ten Commandments, sermon on the mount
Natural law
Moral thinking we are all able to do. Given this capacity by God, this involves a rational reflection on our human nature, considering how we might do good and avoid evil, and working out secondary precepts for situations
Human law
Customs of practices of society, devised by governments and by societies. Ideally, government laws should be based on what we reason from natural law.
What is the relationship between the 4 laws
Hierarchical, all laws relying on the eternal law
Eudaimonia
Human flourishing - happiness
Phronesis
Practical wisdom and moral decision making
Naturalistic fallacy
The mistake of defining moral terms with reference to non-moral or natural terms
Natural law can be seen as a helpful way of making moral decisions
Primary precepts are not controversial they are goods valued by all societies both present and past
Unlike all absolutist approaches there is some flexibility
Natural law leads to a 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 are made in God’s image and possess the rational capacity to work out right and wrong via observations of the world
Natural law is unhelpful as an approach to moral decision-making
Can be argued that across societies basic goods can be generalised. Which gods should be worshipped and how many people can be involved in marriages
Too legalistic and fixed, HIV/Aids in adrica as a result of opposing contraception is an example
Naturalistic fallacy -> assuming what happens in the world and assuming this is what must happen
Clarity of the primary precepts and the flexibility of the secondary precepts. Catechism “universal in its approach” and the “application of the natural law varies greatly”
Existentialism
A movement that stresses the uniqueness of each human individual by arguing that existence comes before essence
Essentialists and human nature
Aquinas believed that there is a fixed human nature. We are made in the image of God to have a clear purpose or telos. It’s built into our human nature to fulfil the primary precepts and that it’s mostly right for us to do so
Sartre’s existentialism
Objected may have a fixed nature for example a knife starts as an idea in a makers mind, it’s made for a purpose and must carry out that purpose.
Humans are fundamentally different. As an atheist, humans could only have a purpose or telos if they have been made by God. Therefore, he believes we come into existence first and then we must decide for ourselves what our essence is - in other words what we are for
We are made
We choose our purpose
Sartre on freedom
We have a tendency to deny our freedom and behave as if we were mere objects. Living in bad fait. A waiter who is in over exaggerating his gestures and movements is playing the role of a waiter, as if that’s all he can do.
Essence is not fixed he can choose different employment
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 that they should strive towards
While Aquinas supports telos with reason, divine command theory makes a similar point via revelation; the Bible reveals the ‘plans and purposes that God has for all human beings’ (Jeremiah 29:13)
Natural law is wrong to base ideas of right and wrong on telos because
Aquinas may be making the mistake of assuming that all human beings have the same purpose; it may be possible that each of us have different purposes. Aquinas himself seems to allow this in his recognition that priests who are called to celibacy are exempt from the primary precept of reproduction
Existentialist dispute whether humans have any purpose except the ones they freely choose for themselves. If God does not exist, then it seems difficult to argue for objective human purpose
The scientific theory of evolution seems to suggest that purpose is not a feature of the world, but it’s rather something that human beings project onto the natural world
The idea of telos entails somethings are natural to human beings, and other things are unnatural
Double effect
The idea that is doing something good also produces a bad side-effect, It is still ethically permissible as a bad side-effect was not intended
Interior and exterior acts
For Aquinas, a good actor must have a good motive (interior) as well as being a good action as viewed on the outside (exterior)
To impress the teacher -> giving to charity -> wrong - interior
To prevent starvation -> stealing bread -> wrong - exterior
To prevent starvation -> buying bread -> good
Double effect -> self defence
If you kill someone in self defence, it is not morally wrong
One effect would be the good effect of saving your life however, if the attackers killed, this would be a bad effect linking back to the interior and exterior acts. If you intend a good effect, you are not held responsible for the secondary bad effect.
Applying double effect
Abortion
Euthanasia
In the case of an abortion, if a woman’s life is at risk, if she continues with pregnancy, the doctor would be carrying out one action, an operation with the intention of saving the mothers life, and a secondary effects of ending the life of the foetus
A doctor attempting to treat a seriously ill. Patient gives a large dose of painkillers. Relieving pain is the good effect, which is a doctor’s intention, but runs the risk of causing the death of the patient. The bad effect. If the patient dies, the doctor has done nothing wrong according to natural law as this was an unintended unforeseen consequences of the action.
Double effect is a good way of justifying moral actions because
Double affect allow some flexibility in an otherwise rigid procedure in action that produces both good and bad is permitted provided the good effect is intended
It is a recognition of the complexity of real life situations. Absolutists such as Kant have no answer for situations where duties clash or competing goods cannot be achieved. double affect allows sufficient consequential, thinking into natural law to solve some of these cases.
Double effect is not a good way of justifying moral actions because
It is impossible to genuinely judge the intention of a person likewise, in example of the doctor, and there is no difference between external actions of the one who wishes to relieve pain and the one who wants to kill
It is difficult to know how far to press the idea of double effect and which areas it may cover. The use of contraception with the intention of saving life is a controversial area. In terms of the Roman Catholic Church. Furthermore, double effect could be applied in order to save life or assist reproduction This may cause a slippery slope.
Apparent good
An action, which someone mistakenly thinks is a real good, but they have not reasoned correctly
Real good
Actions which are actually good and consistent with the moral principles of natural law
Stoicism - Greek background to natural law
Zeno, Marcus Aurelius
God, or the codes created it and left within it the logos or divine reason. The divine spark is within each of us, so the reasonable response of humans towards ordered universe is to live an ordered life of virtuous actions.
Right actions are those that we are able to rightly reason. The Roman orator Cicero suggested natural law is right reason in accordance with nature
Aquinas the orientation of human beings
The Synderesis principle suggest that we are directed by something within us to pursue good and avoid evil. Hence, the ability to achieve a good is within each of us if we reason correctly.
He follows Socrates, in suggesting no one ever deliberately does the wrong action they make a reasoning error in pursuing an apparent good rather than a real good.
This can be seen if a man is having an affair, despite being married, making the mistake of thinking that the pleasure he will gain is good. However pleasure is an apparent good
There is an orientation towards the good
There is an order present in creation - Paley’s
arguments on design.
Aquinas is right that we do want to live well, and we naturally aim for goodness. Where we miss, it is because we are unclear on what goodness is, but our aim is nevertheless the same.
Aquinas’s idea on natural law give a dignity to human beings, and places faith in their ability to reason
There is not an orientation towards the good because
To reject the teleological view of the universe more than evolution. Reviews suggest that the universal life on earth are the result of random chance. Dawkins family suggests the Blind watchmaker
Some suggestion that, although it is commendable, Aquinas gives such priority to reason he is being overly optimistic about what reason can achieve
Aquinas’s view of real, an apparent goods could be seen as a little naive some humans knowingly commit evil actions, not all humans, have a natural inclination towards good