Today we will learn more about Aquinas and Natural Law theory WELCOME BACK AS Ethics Today we will learn more about Aquinas and Natural Law theory

In this lesson we will… 1] Learn about the strengths of Natural Law 2] Learn about the weaknesses of Natural Law 3] Make sure everyone has enough information to complete the essay task

Starter time… I’m Morgan, and I Like the way that Aquinas used the ideas of Aristotle and the stoics. We can use our rational ability to work out what is the natural way to l ive an behave I’m Granny, and I like the idea of there being different types of law. God created us and our world. Things have been designed by him! Aquinas is right about the different types of law I think Aquinas natural law theory sounds incoherent these days. What do you mean by ‘natural’? Also, Aquinas is biased - he thinks God exists! I’m an atheist and reject what he says about there being a natural law!

Starter time… What were their names? What did Mirella think? How much do you agree with Granny’s view? How much do you agree with Morgan’s view?

The specification for the AS course says you need to know about Aquinas’ natural law theory The back ground to Natural Law - Aristotle (and the stoics) What Aquinas thought about Natural law Strengths Weaknesses How would Natural law be applied to real ethical dilemmas

Assignment You have to complete this AS essay question on Natural Law 1 a) Explain the Natural Law theory (25 marks) B) ‘The Natural Law theory has no serious weaknesses’ Discuss (10 marks) It is due for next lesson This assignment will be peer assessed before it is marked by the teacher!

Reminders about timings: Reading and making notes = 3 hours Planning time = 30 minutes Writing time = 100 minutes Checking, re-reading, and making any corrections = 20 minutes This comes to about 5 hours! Reminder: You are a full time student, and you ought to be doing around 45 hours of study over each 7 day week! At school you have 4 hours of lessons plus one hour of study time (so about 20hours at school for 4 AS courses) In theory you ought to be doing 5 hours of study for each course! The ‘a’ in ‘AS’ stands for ‘advanced’ - it is supposed to be hard because it is advanced work!

Keep the essay focus in mind As we go through this lesson think about this - and make sure you have enough information to be able to write a perfect essay response to: 1 a) Explain the Natural Law theory (25 marks) B) ‘The Natural Law theory has no serious weaknesses’ Discuss (10 marks)

Individual humans share something in common – their human nature People Humans Homo-sapiens A man… a woman Individual human beings: made up of flesh and blood, DNA, shared genetics Individual humans share something in common – their human nature

The human goal/telos Humans have an ultimate goal/purpose This is connected with God (our hearts are restless until they rest in God!) If we use our intelligence we can work out what our telos is Once we know our goal then we can act accordingly

Natural inclinations Aquinas reckoned that God has instilled in all humans inclinations (desires) to behave in certain ways that lead to the highest good If we follow these natural inclinations then we can achieve the highest good – the thing which makes us complete (eudiamonia) We have a basic inclinations - to avoid evil and do good (achieve good) We are designed for perfection! To be a full human Thinking point – why does praise matter so much to us?

Thinking point: what are your views on Laws? Are laws and rules there to be broken? If people do not follow laws and rules how do you react?

Apparent good Examples: having an affair The apparent good – being in love, the excitement, being desired and wanted: all these are ‘good’ things in themselves… but this is only an apparent good.. Affairs destroy marriages – people are hugely hurt, and often the marriages are destroyed. The affair produces much unhappiness and suffering

Acting according to our goal There is a harmony between your intention and your actions Intentions = what are called the interior act Actions = what are called the exterior act Aquinas is a deontologist: some act are just bad in themselves. Even if your intentions were good it does not justify you in doing the

Primary and secondary precepts Primary precepts of Natural law: Always true Apply to everyone They are obvious or direct reflections of God’s eternal law These are the primary precepts according to Aquinas: The preservation of life Reproduction The nurture and education of the young (to learn) Living peacefully in society To worship God

How much do you agree? The preservation of life I agree this is always true I agree that this law applies to everyone They are obvious or direct reflections of God’s eternal law I think Aquinas was right to describe this as a primary precept

How much do you agree? Reproduction I agree this is always true I agree that this law applies to everyone They are obvious or direct reflections of God’s eternal law I think Aquinas was right to describe this as a primary precept

How much do you agree? Living peacefully in society I agree this is always true I agree that this law applies to everyone They are obvious or direct reflections of God’s eternal law I think Aquinas was right to describe this as a primary precept

How much do you agree? To worship God I agree this is always true I agree that this law applies to everyone They are obvious or direct reflections of God’s eternal law I think Aquinas was right to describe this as a primary precept

Secondary precepts These depend on our own judgements of what actually to do in a given situation These are liable to faulty reasoning We often look at the consequences to work it out – so they can be more teleological. Secondary precepts require: Experience Use of reason The exercise of wisdom

Issues with secondary precepts It is often hard to apply or work out the secondary precepts Example of ‘reproduction’ Does this make IVF acceptable? What about the extra embryos that are used? You need practical wisdom (phronesis)

Connections between the Primary and Secondary precepts You can’t simply read or see straight away how the secondary precepts The primary precepts are not a set of instructions that you can apply to every situation in straight forward way. Example: Primary Precept of reproduction What does this mean for ‘sex’? What is acceptable sex? What are the acceptable ways to have children? What does this mean for IVF? It is not a matter of blanket rules that have to be followed: you have to use reason and creativity to work out what is the best way to achieve human flourishing (eudiamonia)?

What is clever about the relationship between primary and secondary precepts? 1] It allows Aquinas to be flexible: it is NOT a matter of applying blanket rules 2] Aquinas allows us to recognise that there are human weaknesses and limitations (not idealistic) 3] The Natural Law might seem rigid - but the secondary precepts are flexible because they have to be interpreted in the context of different situations 4] General rules that allow for exceptions (this seems like a sensible approach to ethical decisions)

The doctrine of the double effect Aquinas is an absolutist - this is where the primary precepts fit in (they apply to all human beings every where, all of the time) Sometimes in life we face dilemmas where when we do good there are some bad consequences. There is a double effect - we do good and we do bad in the same situation In these situations we need to focus on what our intention is Classic examples: a) removing a fallopian which is cancerous or in which there is an ectopic pregnancy - this is a good thing for the woman’s health But b) this surgery also results in an abortion. The intention is to do (a) and not (b)

The double effect principle Keeps up the distinction between the interior and exterior act Your intentions are primary In some rare occasions there can be a double effect The bad consequences are the unintended side effects Sometimes these bad consequences can be foreseen but they are not intended

Thinking points - some famous dilemmas or issues connected with natural law theory A pregnant woman has cancer in her womb - would removing the womb to treat her cancer be wrong? Sex - the biological purpose of sex is reproduction - this is its primary purpose. BUT a secondary purpose of sex is pleasure and showing love: Does this mean that proper sex ought to be always or only connected with reproduction? How far should the secondary purposes of sex be considered? In war the double effect principle is used: is it acceptable or permissible to bomb a military base that is in the middle of a civilian area and next to a hospital if the deaths causes were not intended but simply foreseen - as double effect?

Summary of natural law Natural law theory wants to show that there is a standard of morality that is connected with God but it is also separate from God. This is connected with the Euthyphro Dilemma There are 6 main steps in the Natural Law theory:

The six steps in Natural Law: 1] The universe is controlled by laws of nature (eternal laws) 2] These laws work in harmony in a rational structure 3] The laws of nature also express purpose (eg the eyes fulfill the purpose of seeing) 4] The laws of nature also express values (eg eyes which can see are good, and those which cannot are bad). To be good is to follow our in built purpose - do what is natural (of nature) as it is good and avoid what is unnatural (not of nature). 5] The laws of nature are rational do we can understand them by using reason 6] Morality is independent of religion and both the believer and the non-believer have to find out how to live a moral life by listening to reason

Strengths and Weakness of Natural Law What is good about Natural Law theory? Are you convinced - is this the best way of explaining ethics?

Strengths of Natural Law It allows for a clear cut approach to morality and establishes common rules that apply to everyone All human societies agree on the primary precepts: preserving human life, reproduction, learning, and living in society. This makes natural law reasonable Natural law emphasises reason: using our rational ability to apply the general rule to given situations Natural Law focuses on human flourishing rather than blindly following rules (it is about character: becoming a flourishing human being) Aquinas emphasises ‘phronesis’; practical wisdom (so it is not just about using reasoning) Natural law shows that morality is about finding eudiamonia and not about deontological or teleological

Evaluation time How good are these points? Green = a strong point Yellow = average/ok Red = poor point/not convincing

How good are these points: 1] It allows for a clear cut approach to morality and establishes common rules that apply to everyone 2] All human societies agree on the primary precepts: preserving human life, reproduction, learning, and living in society. This makes natural law reasonable 3] Natural law emphasises reason: using our rational ability to apply the general rule to given situations 4] Natural Law focuses on human flourishing rather than blindly following rules (it is about character: becoming a flourishing human being) 5] Aquinas emphasises ‘phronesis’; practical wisdom (so it is not just about using reasoning) 6] Natural law shows that morality is about finding eudiamonia and not about deontological or teleological

Weakness of Natural Law Who decides what is ‘natural’ or ‘unnatural’? Why should we accept Aquinas’ definition? How do we know or work out what the eternal and divine laws are? Surely it depends on a big ‘IF’ - if God exists then maybe there is a natural law BUT has Aquinas really proved that God exists? He would say he has … but do the arguments for God’s existence really work?????? Aquinas has committed the Naturalistic Fallacy: The philosopher Moore pointed out that ‘goodness’ in unanalysable - we cannot define it but Aquinas attempts to in his natural law theory

Weakness of Natural Law Aquinas reckons that humans are social animals and that it is part of our nature to live in peace with each other, to care for others. Then Aquinas goes on to argue that this property of caring for others is part of our human nature Aquinas can be accused to trying to get an ought (value) from an is (fact) It might be part of our nature to care but this is not to prove that one ought to care for others Modern science would reject Aquinas assumptions about human nature and the ‘laws’ he basis his ethics on. Example: Darwin and evolution - it is all to do with natural selection and not God’s purpose or design [Design argument: surely this does not work!!!!!!] There is no divine purpose - there is a best a blind watch maker Is there really a single human nature common to all of us?

Other criticisms Natural law theory puts a huge emphasis on ‘reason’ and rational ability: perhaps he is too trusting of human rational ability (Barth) In the past Natural Law theory has been associated with Casuistry - which has led to some people getting too concerned with following every little rule. Catholics have often been accused of being too hung up on following rules too strictly. Natural Law theory is not good at helping us to work out major ethical problems in human life: such as should more money be spent on hospitals or on schools How do we work out the ‘purpose’ of things like ‘sex’ / reproduction? Is there just one purpose? How do we/could we work out the final purposes of things?

The problem of applying Natural Law to practical ethics There are ethical theories - these focus on our norms - how ought we live? There is practical ethics - dilemmas or issues in human life One big issue in ‘ethics’ as a subject is about how you would apply ethical theories to the various practical ethics How would you apply natural law to things like IVF? How would you apply natural law to things like Voluntary Euthanasia?

Applying Natural Law Group 1: Read the text about Euthanasia - get ready to present these issues to the rest of the class Group 2: Read the text about IVF - get read to present these issues to the rest of the class

Working out your view: use the mini-white boards What do you like about Natural Law? What do you dislike about Natural Law? Was your teacher right to emphasis more weaknesses than strengths with this approach?

PLENARY 1] How confident are you about the essay? 2] Suggest some problems with the Natural Law theory of ethics 3] What makes this topic very hard to understand? 4] How could your learning have been improved in this lesson [I would have learnt more if………] 5] How would you grade your learning today … using the scale of 1 - 10