natural law Flashcards
INTRO
Aquinas says natural law is the same for all people. There is a single standard of truth and right for everyone, which is known by everyone intrinsically. If we all act according to reason, then we will all agree to some overarching general rules (what Aquinas callsprimary precepts)
TELOS
Natural law ethics goes back to Aristotle and his theory of telos; that everything has a nature which directs it towards a particular end goal. Aquinas Christianised this idea, adding that it is the Christian God who set a thing’s telos according to his omnibenevolent plan for the universe
aquinas - The telos/end/goal of rational beings is the goodness of God, which for us involves glorifying God by following God’s moral law - end is to be united with the Christian God and called this the Beatific Vision
Following God’s natural law results in flourishing (eudaimonia) both for individuals and society.
Francis Bacon, called the father of empiricism, argued that only material and efficient causation were valid scientific concepts, not formal and final causation. The idea of telos is unscientific.
It is a biological fact that certain behaviours cause an organism to flourish. Telos thus seems an empirically valid concept.
Dawkins responds that it’s not valid to simply assume that there actually is a ‘why’
Those who claim purpose exists have the burden of providing a reason to think it exists.
outdated
A strength of Natural law ethics is its availability to everyone because all humans are born with the ability to know and apply the primary precepts.
through synderesis we learn the primary precepts: worship God, live in an orderly society, reproduce, educate, protect and preserve human life and defend the innocent
Fletcher/ Freud argues this shows there is not an innate God-given ability of reason to discover a natural law
cross-cultural morality might result merely from the basic requirement of a society to function.
J. S. Mill calls the Old Testament “Barbarous, and intended only for a barbarous people”. Freud similarly argued that religious morality reflected the “ignorant childhood days of the human race”.
because those precepts are imagined to come from an eternal being, they become inflexible and painstakingly difficult to progress. This makes them increasingly outdated.
absolutism
The legalistic way of working out how to solve ethical problems is helpful as it allows humans to link the immediate moral dilemna to a bigger general rule
‘a rule that binds men among themselves and imposes…common principles’ (catechism of the catholic church, 1957)
- oversimplification of human behaviour - Perhaps it would make more sense to have a conscious world view that emphasises the change, developing and evolving nature
optimism
Natural Law is too optimistic about the human capacity to act morally under its own reason
Thomas Hobbes, who lived through the English civil war and saw Parliament execute the King, saw human nature as dangerous and murderous
Protestant theologians also questioned the faith that Aquinas’ Natural Law placed in the moral reasoning of fallen beings, arguing that human beings are sinners, as taught in Calvins doctrine of total depravity, and are corrupted by pride and self interest
“the finite has no capacity for the infinite” – Karl Barth
human reason cannot reach God or God’s morality
human development is damaging the natural world through pollution and depletion of natural resources. The idea that humans naturally want to do good can be challenged. As utilitarians suggest, perhaps we have a natural urge toward pursuing our own pleasure
conflicts
doctrine of double effect = whilst keeping the primary precept by preserving your own life, you simultaneously break it as you kill someone. - situations when the precepts are in opposition + what is important is the motives. if the harmful effect is a side-effect of trying to keep a Primary Precept rather than the intention of the action, it is ok.
helps to resolve seemingly disparate biblical themes
theologians reject the double effect as unbiblical because God’s commandments are presented as absolute and not dependent on someone’s intention
Natural law is different to the Bible. The Bible might be inflexible, but that is the divine law. The natural law in our nature is more flexible because it is in the form of very general precepts which require application
Proportionalism is an example of this - Bernard Hoose
Proportionalism is a middle way between deontology and consequentialism: in unavoidable circumstances where good and evil will result from an action, the proportion between the two is weighed in choosing the lesser of two evils.
never right to go against a principle unless a proportionate reason would justify it.
However, it has been condemned by the Roman Catholic church as consequentialism
but arguably it is the application of natural law in practical reasoning to bring about a proportionate good as opposed to the cruel inflexibility of exceptionless laws.
pragmatic - It fits with the reality of moral decision making. Sometimes actions can have two effects and a method is required that makes sense of how to judge them
goods and evils are defined in relation to whatever enables or disables flourishing. Flourishing is part of our telos. So arguably following proportionalism would successfully orientate us towards our telos
fact-value gap
natural law is guilty of leaping from descriptions of essential nature of things in the world (facts) to prescriptions about how they ought to act or behave
- THEREFORE, Can what is ‘good’ be defined as being ‘natural’ without asking ‘is what is natural good?’
