What is Natural Law Ethics?

what is natural law ethics natural law ethics is a popular name attributed to the model of ethics developed by st. Thomas Aquinas during the medieval period because it is developed by st. Thomas Aquinas natural law ethics is also called domestic ethics the basic idea in natural law ethics is that reason is the source of the moral law and it directs us towards the good according to Aquinas the good is the ultimate goal of the person's actions and for Aquinas the good is discoverable within the persons nature this explains why the basic goal of natural law

ethics is to do good and avoid evil now how do we know that a person is acting rightly or wrongly well according to Aquinas an act is morally right if it is done in accordance with a moral law now what is the moral law as already mentioned reason is the source of moral law hence the moral law is the dictate of reason but for Aquinas the moral law comes from God's eternal law indeed for Aquinas the moral law is the divine law expressed in human nature which reads do good and avoid evil and so if

the moral law is doing good and avoiding evil how do we know that one is acting in accordance with a good again according to Aquinas the good is that which is suitable to human nature or that which is proper to human nature and for Aquinas we know that an action is good that is suitable to human nature if it is done in accordance with conscience Aquinas understands conscience as the inner voice of the intellect or reason which calls the human person to follow the moral law that is to do good and avoid evil as we

can see in natural law ethics conscience serves as the guide in making moral decisions now how do we know that one's action or based conscience according to Aquinas and action obeys conscience if it satisfies the threefold natural inclination of the human person namely self-preservation just dealing with others and propagation of human species self-preservation for Aquinas is a natural inclination that urges the human person to take care of her health or not to kill or put herself in danger this explains why for Aquinas suicide is absolutely wrong just dealing with others urges us to treat others

with the same respect that we Accord ourselves thus for Aquinas all forms of in humanities such as exploitation seduction deception manipulation cheating kidnapping murder and intimidation are absolutely wrong - in terms of the propagation of human species Aquinas believes that the reproductive organ is by nature designed to reproduce and propagate human species any act of intervention therefore that frustrates the very purpose of the reproductive organ is unnatural hence immoral this explains why even masturbation is in Aurel in natural law ethics it must be noted that for Aquinas if at least one of these three natural

inclinations of the human person is violated then an act does not obey conscience it is therefore immoral needless to say for an action to be considered morally natural law ethics it must be done in accordance with conscience and again it must be done in accordance with a moral law that is doing good and avoiding evil in addition to the threefold natural inclinations of the human person Aquinas introduced three things that determine the morality of a human Act namely first object of the human Act second it's circumstance and third it's and the object of the Act

refers to that which the whale intents primarily and directly it may either be a thing or an action take for example the physicians act of removing a tomb or as we can see the direct object of the Act is to remove a tomb or please note that the circumstance in the end are also intended here but not directly now the circumstance refers to the condition which affects the morality of an action it is important to note that the circumstance may aggravate or mitigate the morality of the human Act Aquinas classified circumstance into first quality of

a person or the WHO second quality or quantity of amoral object or the what third the circumstance of place or where fourth the circumstance of means or by what means fifth the circumstance of end or why six manner in which the action is done or how and seven the time element involved in the performance of the action or when as to the first it is bad to rape a woman but it is worse to rape a daughter as to the second the act of a taxi driver who returns a wallet containing a couple of thousand

dollars is good in itself but that of one who takes the initiative of returning fifty thousand dollars left by a tourist is even better as to the third smoking in public may not be good but it is worse if one smokes inside a church asked to the fourth to pray for a sick person is good in itself but to give her money for medicine or for her medication is better as to the fifth helping an orphan kid finish schooling is good but doing it with the intention of employing her later is better now as to

the sixth killing might generally be conceived as evil but in the case of unjust aggression it might be morally right to kill the aggressor and as to the seventh it might not be a good idea to smoke inside a church but it is worse to do it while the mass is going on the end of the act refers to the purpose of the doer or the agent of the human act itself according to Aquinas it can be taken as a circumstance because the end is an integral part of every moral act for example marrying a

person one is engaged to is good in itself but doing so while motivated by the selfish and of say taking a big share of an inheritance makes the whole action morally wrong it must be noted that for Aquinas all the three determinants of a human act must be all good for an act to be considered good or morally right now sometimes a human act me produced two conflicting results that is one is good and the other is evil to address this dilemma Aquinas formulated the four principles of double effect namely first the action intended must

be good in itself or at least morally indifferent otherwise the act is evil at the very outset second the good effect must follow the action at least as immediately as the evil effect or the good and evil effects must occur simultaneously third the first seen evil effects should not be intended or approved but merely permitted to occur and fourth there must be a proportionate and sufficient reason for allowing the evil effect to occur while performing the action according to Aquinas all of the four principles must be satisfied for an action to be considered morally right

let us take for example the act of removing a cancerous uterus of a pregnant woman which necessarily implies abortion as we can see the act will produce two results one good and the other is evil of course the removal of the cancerous Eder is of a pregnant woman will definitely save her life which is the good result but at the same time it will kill the fetus which is the evil result so what is the morality of the action if we apply Aquinas as four principles of double effect please note that the act is simply

to remove the cancerous uterus so obviously we satisfy principle number one because the intention of removing the cancerous uterus is good in itself we may even view it as morally indifferent we also satisfy principle number two because of the good effect that is the recovery of the pregnant woman follows the action immediately and even if the fetus dies after the removal of the cancerous uterus at least this evil effect occurs simultaneously with a good effect principle number three is also satisfied because abortion that is the death of the fetus was not intended it was just

allowed to happen as we can see the main intention of removing the cancerous uterus of a pregnant woman is to save her life even if the death of the fetus was foreseen according to Aquinas it was just allowed to occur and lastly principle number four is also satisfied because there is indeed a sufficient reason for allowing the evil effect that is abortion or the killing of the fetus to happen needless to say if we don't remove the cancerous uterus then we lose both the lives of the woman in the fetus but if we remove the

cancerous uterus at least as Aquinas would have us believe we save one life as we can see the removal of a cancerous uterus of a pregnant woman which implies abortion is morally right let us take another example that of killing a drug lord as is well known illegal drugs have been destroying many lives both young and old and so killing a drug lord will produce a good result however the act produces an evil result - that is murder so what is the morality of the act of killing the drug lord from the vantage point of

Aquinas four principles of double effect a utilitarian may argue that the act of killing the drug lord is good as it may produce more benefits that is greatest happiness to the greatest number of people concerned however for Aquinas the act of killing the drug lord is intrinsically immoral because as we can see it does not satisfy the first principle of the four principles of double effect the first principle says that the act must be good in itself or at least morally indifferent but the act of killing the drug lord is evil in itself hence even

if this act produces more benefits to many people concerned for Aquinas it is absolutely immoral this explains why the Roman Catholics who adhere to Aquinas as natural law ethics strongly oppose extrajudicial killing in general and killing a drug lord in particular and so since the first principle is violated we need not proceed and check the remaining principles because in the first place the act is already immoral that's it for now thanks for watching another episode of our whiteboard edition here at Gila notes full transcript of this video is available at Fila notes com feel free

to subscribe to our newsletter to keep you posted of our newest content and if you haven't subscribed to our channel yet simply click here and tap the Bell for notifications thanks keep learning you