Natural Law - Ethics Flashcards
Who was Aquinas predominantly influenced by
Aristotle and his ideas about telos.
He especially focused on the Prime Mover, the final cause of all things, and thought it was the Christian God
The telos of rational beings is the goodness of God, which for us involves glorifying God by following God’s moral law
What two paths does free will allow us to take
We can either follow God’s natural law which results in eudaimonia for both individuals and society
Or
Disobey what is naturally good for us, which has the opposite effect
The four tiers of Law
Eternal Law
Divine Law
Natural Law
Human Law
Eternal Law
God’s plan, built into the nature of everything which exists, according to his omnibenevolence
We cannot understand this law, we only have access to lesser laws that derive from the eternal law
Divine Law
God’s revelations to humans e.g the Bible
Natural Law
The Moral Law God created in nature and is discoverable by human reason
Human law
Specification and amplification of Natural Law
Human laws should be derived from natural and divine law; human law gains authority from this, ultimately deriving authority from God’s nature
Synderesis
The habit or ability of reason to discover the foundations of God’s natural moral law
The good is what all things seek as their end; this means that human nature has an innate orientation to the good
Through synderesis we learn the primary precepts. Simply by having reason allows us to intuitively know these precepts and we are all born with the ability to know them
Primary Preccepts
Worship God,
live in an orderly society,
defend the innocent,
reproduce,
educate,
protect and preserve human life
The articulation of the orientations in our nature towards the good; the natural inclinations of our God-designed human nature, put into the form of ethical principles by human reason
Conscientia
The ability of reason to apply the primary precepts
The judgement acquired from this is called secondary precepts
E.g Euthanasia is not explicitly combatted by the primary precepts, but the application of our reason makes us realise it goes contrary to the precept of protecting and preserving human life and arguably disrupts society too - therefore we can conclude the secondary precept that euthanasia is wrong
Exterior acts
A physical action itself is an exterior act because it occurs outside of our mind.
Interior acts
Our intention; what we deliberately choose to do is the interior act because it occurs inside our mind
Is a good exterior act necessarily glorifying God
No, if it is not done with the intention of fulfilling the God-given goal/telos of our nature
Giving money to charity is a good exterior act, but only morally good when combined with the right intention (interior act). If the intention was only to be thought of as a good person, then the action is not truly morally good
A strength of Telos based ethics
Empirical basis
Aristotle observed that everything has a nature which inclines it towards a certain goal which he and Aquinas called its telos. It is a biological fact that certain behaviours cause an organism to flourish
Thus, telos seems an empirically valid concept
Weakness of Telos based ethics
Bacon said only material and efficient causation were valid scientific concepts, not formal and final causation. Telos is unscientific
Physicist Sean Carroll concludes that purpose is not built into the ‘architecture ‘of the universe
The modern world can explain the world without telos through evolution etc
Defence of telos
Polkinghorne notes that science can tell us how and what but not why
Thus, a prime mover or God could still exist to provide some kind of Telos
Evaluation critiquing telos
Dawkins analogises ‘what is the colour of jealousy?’ - the assumption of this question is that jealousy has a colour
Similarly, just because we can ask why we and the universe exist, that doesn’t mean there actually is purpose for it
Dawkins puts the burden of proof upon those who claim purpose exists - there is no scientific basis for thinking anything other than material and efficient causation exist
Furthermore, scientists may one day actually explain the why but even if they don’t it doesn’t justify a non-scientific explanation of purpose such as telos
Strength of Natural Law through universal agreement
The primary precepts are found in the morality of all societies e.g killing arbitrarily and rules about stealing are universal, as are valuing reproduction and education
Additionally, the golden rule of treating others as you wish to be treated is found globally in cultures which suggests moral views are influenced by a universal human moral nature
This is good evidence that we are all born with a moral orientation towards the good, which is the foundation of A’s theory
Weakness of NL through universal agreement
If we are born with the ability to know the Primary Precepts, we should find more moral agreement than we do
This problem is exacerbated when we see it’s not random but falls heavily along cultural lines. This suggests social conditioning causes our moral views rather than a Natural Law. This has been argued by psychologists like Freud
Fletcher argues this shows there is not an innate God-given ability of reason to discover a natural law. He concludes that ethics may be based on faith, not reason (Fletcher’s positivism)
Evaluation defending Aquinas from lack of universality of morality
He claims human nature merely contains an orientation towards the good, not a commitment to humans doing more actual good than evil, nor to incredibly evil acts or cultures occurring infrequently
He acknowledges there are many reasons we might fail to do good despite having an orientation towards it. This includes:
- OG sin
- Mistakes in Conscientia
- Lacking virtue
- Corrupt culture
So that there is a set of core moral views found cross-culturally shows his theory is correct
Evaluation critiquing Aquinas from the lack of universal morality
Cross-cultural morality might result merely from the basic requirement of a society to function. If anyone kills anyone for no reason it might create an existential pressure which influences the moral thinkers of a society, yielding prescriptions such as the golden rule
Thus, cross cultural ethics has a practical basis, not God
Some cross-cultural similarities in moral codes might also have resulted from a biologically evolved moral sense rather than one designed by a God - not related to morality or telos at all
Strength of Natural Law from the balance of good and evil
Its basis gives a balanced view of human nature containing both good and bad. It also adds an engagement with autonomy to Christian ethics, where sola scriptura Protestants are mere receptacles for Biblical commands; Aquinas argues God gave us reason so we may use it
Aquinas accepts that OG sin destroyed original righteousness (perfect rational self-control). However it did not destroy reason itself and its accompanying telos, inclining us towards good
He says only rational beings can sin and that even though OG sin made us sinners, we were not reduced to animals
Aquinas diverges from Augustine, claiming that concupiscence can sometimes be natural to humans
So, a comprehensive approach to Christian morality must include the use of reason to discover and act on the telos of our natures
Weakness of Natural Law from Barth
Barth, who was heavily influenced by Augustine, claimed that after the Fall our ability to reason became corrupted by OG sin
His argument is thus that it’s dangerous to rely on human reason to know anything of God, including morality
Our finite minds cannot grasp God and so whatever humans discover through reason is not divine, so to think it is divine is idolatry
Idolatry can lead to worship of nations and even movements like Nazis
Only faith in God’s revelation in the Bible is valid, human reason cannot reach God or His morality
Judgement defending Aquinas from Barth
Barth’s argument fails because it doesn’t address Aquinas’ point that our reason isn’t always corrupted and OG sin hasn’t destroyed our orientation towards the good
OG sin at most diminishes our inclination towards goodness by creating a habit of acting against it
Sometimes, with God’s grace, our reason can discover knowledge of God’s existence and Natural Moral Law.
So Natural is valid
Judgement critiquing Aquinas from Barth
Barth remains right that our corruption by OG sin makes our reasoning about God’s existence and morality corrupted too
Even if there is a Natural Law, we are unable to discover it reliably with the bad in our nature meaning we cannot rely on the good - whatever a weak and misled conscience discovers is too unreliable
Humanity’s belief it has the ability to know anything of God is the same arrogance that led Adam and Eve to disobey God - this belief in our power of figuring out right and wrong led to the arrogant certainty of Nazis in their superiority
This arrogance of Natural Theology is evidence of a human inability to be humble enough to solely rely on faith
Universal access to Natural Law
All humans are born with the ability to know and apply the Primary Precepts
Even those who do not follow Christianity can: ‘Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature what the law requires… God’s law is written in their hearts, for their own conscience and thoughts either accuse them or tell them they are doing right’ - Romans 2:14-15
So it is possible to follow NL, regardless of your faith and access to the Bible
Outdatedness of Natural Law
Secularists argue Biblical morality is primitive and barbarous, emerging from ancient human minds
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’
Aquinas’ ethic is thus criticised for this reason as it was required to prevent societal collapse
For example:
- Once useful to restrict sexual behaviour to marriage because of how economically fatal single motherhood used to be
- Useful to have more children because most died
Clearly these socio-economic conditions have changed so primary precepts are no longer useful and society can afford to relax the rules without social order being threatened
Evaluation defending Aquinas from outdatedness
Catholics argue it’s not outdated because it allows our society to flourish and counteracts the retrograde in Western ethics
For example:
- Marriages are fewer and less successful
- Higher rate of mental illness
People are no longer united by ethics but by consumerism and materialism
So, religious and natural law ethics aren’t outdated by are a vital societal anchor for morality, meaning and purpose
‘Excluding God, religion and virtue from public life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society and thus to a reductive vision of the person and his destiny’ - Pope Benedict XIV
Evaluation critiquing Aquinas for outdatedness
NL is outdated because Aquinas’ theory was a reaction to his socio-economic context, which has changed drastically
He thought he discovered the primary precepts through reason, but a simpler explanation is that Aquinas intuited what was good for people in his socio-economic condition
The great strength of religion as a form of societal organisation is also its greatest weakness:
By telling people that its ethical precepts come from God creates a strong motivation to follow them.
Yet, because those precepts come from an eternal being, they become inflexible and painstakingly difficult to progress - this makes them increasingly outdated
Doctrine of Double Effect
Permits actions which contradict one primary precept if the action is in an effort to primarily preserve another
E.g allowing condoms to prevent the spread of HIV
Permitting condoms under ‘preserve and protect life’
Contradicting ‘nurture and foster the young’
Four conditions of the Doctrine of Double Effect
The intentionality condition - Good effect must be intended and the bad ‘besides the intention’ e.g killing another in self defence is okay so long as you’re objective was to save your own life
The proportionality condition - Good effect must be at least equivalent to the bad effect
The means-end condition - good and bad effect must both be brought about simultaneously and immediately, otherwise the bad is being used to bring about the good - not permissible
The nature of the act condition - the action must be either morally good, indifferent or neutral e.g killing an innocent can never be justified
Strength of the Doctrine of Double Effect from the Bible
It helps to resolve seemingly disparate Biblical themes - Jesus’ commands weren’t merely about following certain rules, but also about having the right moral intention and virtue, e.g Sermon on the Mount
The DoDE provides important clarity to Christian ethics by showing the relation between the important moral elements of intention and following the moral law
Good intention is important and, when involved in an action that has a good effect, can justify permitting a bad side effect
Weakness of the Doctrine of Double Effect from unbiblicalness
God’s commandments are presented as absolute and not dependent on someone’s intention
The distinction between intended effects of action and merely foreseen effects ‘beside’ the intention has no morally relevant significance
Intention isn’t irrelevant, e.g accidentally running over someone in the street who stepped out, however, if you can foresee a bad consequence, the fact it was a secondary effect doesn’t justify it
Evaluation defending NL from unbiblicalness
It’s an unsuccessful criticism because NL is different to the Bible - the Bible is inflexible, but that is the Divine Law
The Natural Law is more flexible because it is in the form of very general precepts which require application and the telos of the Natural Law is glorifying God, which requires that it be our intention to glorify God - thus showing how intentions are relevant
Evaluation criticising Natural Law from lack of Bible
This weakness is successful because it shows that NL is trying to add flexibility to inflexible Biblical Law
The Natural and Divine Law don’t cover separate areas but cross over and so conflict on this point of inflexibility
Christians must choose the Bible over Natural Law
