Transcript Lecture 2: Virtue Ethics and Natural Law Theory

Lecture 2: Virtue Ethics &
Introduction to Natural Law Theory
Basic Framework of Virtue Ethics:
What type of a person should you be?
Premise 1: An action is right iff it is what a
virtuous agent would do in similar
circumstances.
Premise 1a: A virtuous agent is one who acts
virtuously, i.e., one who has and exercises the
virtues.
Premise 2: A virtue is a character trait a human
being needs to flourish or live well.
Overview of Ethical Systems: Virtue Ethics:
Rather than focusing on what we ought to do, Virtue ethics offers a distinctive approach
whereby we focus on human character asking the question, “What should I be?” Thus, ethical
life involves envisioning ideals for human life and embodying those ideals in one’s life. Virtues
are ways in which we embody those ideals.
Virtue is an
excellence of
some sort.
Originally the
word meant
“strength”
and referred
to as
“manliness.”
In Aristotle’s
ethics (arete)
is used which
is trans. as
“excellences
of various
types.”
Aristotle says there
are 2 types of virtue:
intellectual virtues:
excellences of the
mind (e.g., ability to
understand, reason, &
judge well);
moral virtues:
learned by repetition
(e.g., practicing
honesty we become
honest. To be virtuous
requires knowledge,
practice, & consistent
effort at character
building.
Plato (c.427-347c):
To be virtuous we must
understand what
contributes to our
overall good & have
our desire (appetitive;
workers), spirit
(warriors), & reason
(ruler-guardians)
educated properly so
they will aggregate with
the guidance provided
by the rational part of
the soul (Books 2 & 3
of Republic). When
these 3 parts of the soul
conflict with each other,
it might move us to act
in ways that go against
the greater good
(become incontinent).
Aristotle: “Must have knowledge, second he must choose
the acts and choose them for their own sakes, &
finally his actions must proceed from a firm
character” (1105a).
Socrates: Virtue is Knowledge. No one
intentionally pursues what is wrong;.
Ignorance and forgetfulness are at fault
when one does something wrong.
Plato (c. 427-347) is concerned with the quality
of a person’s inner state & he prized
beauty, health, harmony, & strength of a
soul as the virtues we should emulate. We
must have a well-ordered soul whereby our
appetites (temperance), emotions
(courage), and reason (wisdom) operate in
their respective roles. When reason
governs, justice manifests itself from out of
the well-ordered person.
Aristotle (384-322): The function of man is
reason (the good of the thing is when it
performs its function well) which is
peculiar to him. Thus, the function of man
is reason and the life that is distinctive of
humans is the life in accordance with
reason. If the function of man is reason,
then the good man is the man who reasons
well This is the life of excellence
(eudaimonia; human flourishing & wellbeing).
Overview of Ethical Systems: Plato (427-347 B.C.)
Plato believed our natural desires are greedy and depraved. Thus, they must
be held in tight check by the powers of reason. He compared the human soul to
a city-state made up of ruler-guardians, guardians, and the peasants/artisans.
Every reality is an archetype of a corresponding eternal form. The goal of life is to
actualize one’s true nature together with one’s many innate potentialities.
4 primary
integrated
virtues:
Wisdom:
corresponds to
reason; courage:
corresponds to
the will:
temperance,
corresponds to
desire: justice:
links individual
to society.
So long as the
individual is
governed by
the power of
reason, and
reason is
assisted by
courage and
will power
(guardians),
the unruly
desires can be
suppressed.
If reason for
a moment
lets down its
guard, then
the desires
will exert
their power,
seize control,
and lead the
person to
corruption
and
immorality.
The highest good is
the well-ordered
whole to which
each part
contributes
according to its
own capacity. A
thing in reality is
good insofar as it
participates in &
corresponds to the
form of the good
(which is the high
point of the forms).
Main Points to Know:

Plato writes dialogues rather than philosophical
treatises. Hence, most of his philosophical
positions are voiced through the character of
Socrates. Even though Socrates was Plato's
actual teacher, the positions and doctrines
traditionally attributed to Socrates are actually
Plato's account of his teacher. Socrates never
wrote anything.

Plato advances a teleological conception of
morality, "we live the good life insofar as we
perform our distinctively human function well."
Main Points to Know:

The soul is divided into three parts: appetitive,
spirit, and reason. Each part helps us to fulfill
critical needs, but in Plato's view, only the
rational part of the soul is fit to rule.

In order to live a virtuous life, it is necessary for
the individual to cultivate balance in his/her soul.
Thus, persons ruled by appetite or spirit
(emotion) are "out of balance" and their actions
are apt to provoke personal or social
disharmony.
Main Points to Know:

Appetite: In cases where appetite rules (oligarchic and
tyrannical characters fit here) individuals are at the mercy
of the their biological or material whims. Alcohol addiction
fits this profile. Individuals who are addicted to selfdestructive patterns of behavior are apt to feed their
appetites at the expense of other life pursuits. People
can also be ruled by material greed in much the same
way. The key here is that desire is determinative; these
are cravings of the highest degree.
Main Points to Know:

Spirit: The emotional, passionate side of our
character is centered on the idea of status on a
social level. Ambition, desire for honor and glory,
moral indignation, and cravings for admiration,
all fit under the umbrella of spirit. Love
relationships fit into this category as well. Our
interactions with others provide core experiences
that influence our emotional development.
Main Points to Know:

Reason: The intellectual, thinking part of the soul
that must weigh options, decide between
alternatives, and "suppress dangerous urges.“
Plato clearly puts reason in control of the soul
because it acts as good counsel seeking
understanding and insight before acting. Rational
individuals possess a strong contemplative
faculty. They think before they act and are
unlikely to take rash action in any given situation.
Know Thyself:

Plato contends that each one of us performs/does one thing best.
We each have one best skill and it is the development of this skill
that is of paramount importance in creating a harmonious existence.
If we do not have insight into what we do best, the chances of
achieving a balanced soul are likely reduced. Hence the Socratic
imperative, "know thyself."

Just Society: First ask yourself: is it possible to have a just society?
What would it look like? How would we direct education, the
economy, leisure, and social resources? What is fair?

Plato wrestles with the idea of justice in his most famous work
entitled, The Republic.
Plato views social justice exactly parallels his notion of
individual justice. There are three parts of the soul and three
corresponding divisions in the social order. The social order is
constructed as follows:
SOUL
Reason
Spirit
Appetite
SOCIETY
Philosopher-King
Auxiliaries/Guardians
Craftsmen/Artisans/Traders
Overview of Ethical Systems:
Aristotle (384-322 B.C.):
Though we are naturally suited to moral goodness,
we don’t automatically develop such inclinations
Your
habits &
inclination
s develop
with
practice;
what you
sow is
what you
reap.
Carefully cultivate moral
goodness by rigorous
practice.
In order to desire to act
virtuously you must
carefully and consistently
practice doing right until it
becomes habitual & natural.
With practice & diligence you can develop
the habits & inclinations of a virtuous
person.
Ideal of virtue is doing the
right thing because you
want to do the right thing:
you desire to act virtuously.
If you act selfishly then you
will become a selfish person.
Eventually what feels right
to you may be very wrong.
Thus, choose to be
virtuous. Desire +
judgment must agree.
What is Virtue Ethics?
Virtue Ethics emphasizes the development of character
as its central theme rather than trying to define 'goodness'
or 'rightness'. It is a eudaimonistic theory as it holds
'happiness' to be our highest goal. According to Aristotle,
we attain happiness by cultivating both intellectual and
moral virtue. We become virtuous by habit: we
deliberately and consistently choose the mean between
excess and deficiency until it becomes second-nature.
What is Virtue Ethics?
“We are what we repeatedly do.
Excellence, then, is not an act, but a
habit.”
~ Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics
Virtue = excellence:

Intellectual virtue can be taught.

A good person succeeds at rational
activity.

Moral virtue is acquired through excellent
habits.

We become good by doing good things.

We become virtuous by practicing virtuous
acts.
On Becoming Agathos & Eudaimon
From Aristotle’s Point of View:
Cited from Michael Boylan, Basic Ethics (Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 2000), 52.
Step 1:
Master the functional requirements within a given type of task or behavior. Master a good
habit.
Step 2:
Possess the habitual mastery of the functional requirements to an appropriate degree.
Possess habitual mastery of that habit.
`
Step 3:
Steps 1 & 2: excellence in that task or behavior. Achieve excellence in the habit.
Step 4:
Possess habitual excellence in a number of key tasks or behavior.
Step 5:
Possess habitual excellence in those tasks or behavior that the common opinion judges to be
the most worthy.
Step 6:
Steps 4 & 5 leads to agathos.
Step 7:
Possessing Agathos leads to eudaimon.
Thus, on balance, excellent traits in human character generally produce excellent actions.
Virtue Ethics: What kind of person should I be?
What is a virtue?
A virtue is a habit of excellence, a beneficial tendency, a skilled
disposition that enables a person to realize the crucial potentialities
that constitute proper human flourishing (eudaimonia).
What is a habit? A disposition to think, feel, desire, and act in a
certain way without having a tendency to consciously will to do so.
What is a character: The sum-total of one’s habits, tendencies, and
well-being.
Four cardinal virtues: temperance, courage, prudence, and justice.
Piety (reverence to the gods) is sometimes considered a fifth virtue.
Closer Look at Virtue:

“A virtue such as honesty or generosity is not just a tendency
to do what is honest or generous, nor is it to be helpfully
specified as a "desirable" or "morally valuable" character trait.
It is, indeed a character trait — that is, a disposition which is
well entrenched in its possessor, something that, as we say
"goes all the way down", unlike a habit such as being a teadrinker — but the disposition in question, far from being a
single track disposition to do honest actions, or even honest
actions for certain reasons, is multi-track. It is concerned with
many other actions as well, with emotions and emotional
reactions, choices, values, desires, perceptions, attitudes,
interests, expectations and sensibilities. To possess a virtue is
to be a certain sort of person with a certain complex mindset.
(Hence the extreme recklessness of attributing a virtue on the
basis of a single action)” ~ Stanford Encyclopedia
Three Central Themes:

Three Central Themes:
A.
Virtue (arete): A habit of excellence, a beneficial tendency, a
skilled disposition that enables a person to realize the crucial
potentialities that constitute proper human flourishing.

A habit is a disposition to think, feel, desire, and act in a certain way without
having a tendency to will consciously to do so.

“Character” may be defined as the sum-total of one’s habits.
C.
Eudaimonia (Human Flourishing; Successful Living):
C.
Phronesis (practical wisdom): How?

Practice The Golden Mean: Be moderate in all things to an appropriate
degree; avoid both deficiency and excessiveness; cultivate proper virtues that
are deemed most worthy by your community;

Mimic, follow the virtuous person.
Practical Wisdom (Phronesis):

A good person consistently does the right thing
at the right time, in the right way, and for the
right reason.

There is no rule for becoming good, or for
distinguishing good from bad, right from wrong.

Practical wisdom: ability to draw the right
distinctions and tell right from wrong.
A Character Trait is a Virtue IFF it is conducive to eudaimonia: The Golden Mean:
Virtue
Excess
Deficiency
Sphere
Courage
Rashness
Cowardice
Danger
Temperance
Self-indulgence
Insensibility
Sensual pleasure
Liberality
Wasteful
Stinginess
Money
Magnificence
Vulgarity
Penny pinching
Great wealth
Pride
Vanity
Humility
Honor & self-respect
Right Ambition
Overly ambitious Lack of ambition Honor
Good temper
No emotion
Quick-temper
Insult
Ready wit
Buffoonishness
Boorishness
Humor
Truthfulness
Boastfulness
Modesty
Self-description
Friendliness
Flattery
Quarrelsome
Social association
Shame
Bashfulness
Pretense
Wrongdoing
Righteous
Spite
Envy
Fortune of others
Justice
Greed
?
Scarce goods
Virtue
(courage)
People
Degree
Vice
(cowardice)
Duration
Vice
(Rashness)
Objects
Occasions
Brutish
Virtue as a Mean:

We must give in to desire in the right
circumstances, in the right way, for the right
reason, etc.

Practical wisdom allows us to find the mean.

There’s no rule for doing this.

You must learn to see what is right
Virtue as a Mean
Virtues are means between extremes
 Virtues constrain desires
 But we may constrain too little or too much

MODERATION IN ALL THINGS IS
PARAMOUNT!
In the virtuous person, desire and judgment agree whereby the
choices and actions will be free of the conflict and pain that
inevitably accompany those who are akratic and/or enkratic:
The akratic:
The akratic is the
morally weak person
who desires to do
other than what he
knows ought to be
done and acts on this
desire against his
better judgment.
The enkratic:
The enkratic is the
morally strong
person who shares
the akratic agent’s
desire to do other
than what he knows
ought to be done, but
acts in accordance
with his better
judgment.
In neither kind of choice are desire and judgment in
Why does desire and judgment
agree for the virtuous?

The reason why the choices and actions will be
free of the conflict and pain that inevitably
accompanies those of the akratic and enkratic
agent is because the part of their soul that
governs choice and action is so disposed that
desire and judgment coincide. The disposition is
concerned with choices as would be determined
by the person of practical wisdom (phronesis);
these will be actions lying between extreme
alternatives. They will lie in a man-popularly
called the “golden mean”-relative to the talents
and stores of the agent.
Why does desire and judgment
agree for the virtuous?

Choosing in this way is not easily done. It involves, for
instance, feeling anger or extending generosity at the
right time, toward the right people, in the right way, and
for the right reasons. Intellectual virtues, such as
excellence at mathematics, can be acquired by teaching,
but moral virtues cannot. I may know what ought to be
done and even perform virtuous act without being able to
act virtuously. Nonetheless, because moral virtue is a
disposition concerning choice, deliberate performance of
virtuous acts can, ultimately, instill a disposition to
choose them in harmony and with pleasure, and hence,
to act virtuously.
What does it take to be fully virtuous?
The fully virtuous do what they should without a struggle against contrary
desire; possess practical wisdom (phronesis) which is the knowledge or
understanding that enables its possessor to do just that in any given
situation. Most contend that phronesis comes out of at least three sources:
1.
Comes only with the experience of life. The virtuous are mindful of the
consequences of possible actions. How could they fail to be reckless,
thoughtless and short-sighted if they were not? Moreover, they have
developed the capacity to recognize some features of a situation as
more important than others, or indeed, in that situation, as the only
relevant ones. The wise do not see things in the same way as the
nice adolescents who, with their imperfect virtues, still tend to see the
personally disadvantageous nature of a certain action as competing in
importance with its honesty or benevolence or justice.
2.
They mimic, follow the virtuous person.
* We might add that it also takes a certain set of external goods (e.g., right
background, right education, right financial resources, right community, etc).
3 Commonly Ascribed “Advantages” of Virtue Ethics:

Focuses on the development of habits that promote human
excellence.

Focuses on an account in which being virtuous means
recognizing how rational behavior requires being sensitive to
the social and personal dimensions of life.

Focuses on how “rational” actions are not based on abstract
principles but on moderation.
Common Criticisms of Virtue Ethics (VE):

Vast differences on what constitutes a virtue (e.g., different people, societies,
opinions, etc).

VE lacks clarity in resolving moral conflicts.

VE is self-centered because its primary concern is the agent’s own character.

“Well-being” is a master value & all other things are valuable only to the extent
that they can contribute to it.

VE is imprecise: It fails to give us any help with the practicalities of how we
should behave.

VE leaves us “hostage to luck” for only some will attain moral maturity; others
will not. Moreover, life is very fragile. One small misstep and it will cost you
everything; it will forever be beyond your reach.
New Material:

We will now turn to examine Theistic
Deontological Ethics with Natural Law
Theory:

Next Time we will explore Thomas
Aquinas’ “four cardinal virtues” and
Introduce Kant’s deontological model as a
model that became secular.
Deontological Framework:

An action is right if and only if (iff) it is in accordance with a
moral rule or principle.

This is a purely formal specification, forging a link
between the concepts of right and action and moral rule,
and gives one no guidance until one knows what a moral
rule is.
Deontological Framework:

So, the next thing the theory needs is a premise about that: A moral rule
is one that would have been historically:
A.
Theistic:
1.
Given to us by God;
2.
Is required by Natural Law (theistic connection);
B.
Secular (though can still be connected to God):
1.
2.
3.
4.
Is laid on us by reason.
Is required by rationality;
Would command universal acceptance;
Would be the object of choice of all rational beings.
Deontological Ethics:
In sum, we should choose actions based on their
inherent, intrinsic worth; evangelical approaches to
ethics are deontological because it presupposes
Scripture as revelation.
“Deontological” comes from the Greek word
“deon”, meaning that which is binding, in particular
a binding duty. So, you are bound to your duty.
Deontological Ethics
For example, a deontologist might argue that a
promise ought to be kept simply because it is right
to keep a promise, regardless whether the doing so
will have good or bad consequences.
In contrast, a utilitarian will argue that we should
keep our promises only when keeping them results
in better consequences than the alternatives.
Deontological Ethics
It holds that acts are right or wrong in and of
themselves because of the kinds of acts they are and
not simply because of their ends or consequences.
- The ends do not justify the means.
- A good end or purpose does not justify a bad
actions.
- You are duty-bound; binding is not dependent
on consequences, no matter if it is painful or
pleasurable.
Deontological Ethics
For example:
1. You are duty-bound to keep your promise to be
faithful to your spouse, even if a more attractive
person comes along.
2. You are duty-bound to always telling the truth, even
if it cost you a job.
Duty is not based on what is pleasant or beneficial, but rather
upon the obligation itself.
Natural Law Theory:
“I do not feel obliged to believe that the
same God who has endowed us with sense,
reason, and intellect has intended us to
forgo their use.”
~ Galileo Galilei.
Natural Law Theory:
1. It is moral law presumed to be grounded in nature
itself. A natural law is a norm for ethical behavior
that is deemed binding on all humans because it
coheres with the human essence or with the structure
of the universe (grounded in nature itself), perhaps
because it was legislated by God.
2. Insofar as natural law can be known by reason
alone, without special revelation, they provide
guidance for all humans, and when followed they
enhance the common good, but also render each
person morally responsible to a divine judge.
What is Natural Law?
“What do we mean by natural law? In its simplest definition,
natural law is that ‘unwritten law’ that is more or less the
same for everyone everywhere. To be more exact, natural
law is the concept of a body of moral principles that is
common to all humankind and, as generally posited, is
recognizable by human reason alone. Natural law is
therefore distinguished from -- and provides a standard for -positive law, the formal legal enactments of a particular
society.” ~ Dr. Jonathan Dolhenty
What is Natural Law?
“Since law must always be some dictate of reason, natural
law also will be some dictate of reason. In fact, it is law
discovered by human reason. Our normal and natural grasp
of the natural law is effected by reason, that is, by the
thinking mind, and in this service reason is sometimes
called ‘conscience.’” ~ Jonathan Dolhenty, “An Overview of
Natural Law Theory.”
What is Natural Law?
Dr. Dolhenty goes on to say:
“We, in all our human acts, inevitably see them in their
relation to the natural law, and we mentally pronounce upon
their agreement or disagreement with the natural law. Such
a pronouncement may be called a ‘judgment of conscience.’
The ‘norm’ of morality is the natural law as applied by
conscience. Lastly, we can say that the natural law is the
disposition of things as known by our human reason and to
which we must conform ourselves if we are to realize our
proper end or ‘good’ as human beings.”
Natural Law Theory:
3. The idea initially arose among the Jews,
Greeks, and Romans, esp. promoted by
Judaism and Stoics. But it came to the
foreground in the Christian tradition as
thinkers drew from both philosophy and the
Bible to devise a theory of morality and
politics that could be understood to be
universally applicable.
Natural Rights: Entitlements with which
humans are endowed by nature or by virtue
of their status as being human.
Consider:

Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) states, “one part of what
is politically just is natural, and the other part
legal. What is natural has the same validity
everywhere alike, independent of its seeming so
or not. What is legal is what originally makes no
difference [whether it is done] one way or
another, but makes a difference whenever
people have laid down the rule, e.g., … that a
goat rather than two sheep should be
sacrificed.” ~ Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics,
Book V, 133.
Consider:

Aristotle also states in On Rhetoric, book
1, chap. 13:
“there is in nature a common principle of
the just and unjust that all people in some
way divine [discern], even if they have no
association or commerce with each other.”
Consider:
Marcus Tullius Cicero (10643 B.C.):
He described “Law” as “the
reason highest, implanted
in Nature, which
commands what ought to
be done and forbids the
opposite” [Laws, in Great
Legal Philosophers, 44].
He said that “right is based,
not upon men’s opinions,
but upon Nature” [Ibid., 45].
Cicero goes on to say:
“What is right and true is also eternal, and does not
begin or end with written statutes…. From this point of
view it can readily understood by that those who
formulated wicked and unjust statutes for nations,
thereby breaking their promises and agreements, put
into effect anything but ‘laws.’ It may thus be clear that
in the very definition of the term ‘law’ there inheres the
idea and principle of choosing what is just and true….
Therefore Law is the distinction between things just and
unjust, made in agreement with that primal and most
ancient of all things, Nature; and in conformity to nature’s
standard are framed those human laws which inflict
punishment upon the wicked but defend and protect the
good” (Ibid., 51).
In his article, “Natural Law in the Teachings of the
Reformers”, Journal of Religion 168 (1946), 26, John T.
McNeill writes:
“There is no real discontinuity between the teaching of the
Reformers and that of their predecessors with respect to
natural law. Not one of the leaders of the Reformation
assails the principle. Instead, with the possible exception of
Zwingli, they all are on occasion express a quite
ungrudging respect for the moral law naturally implanted in
the human heart and seek to inculcate this attitude in their
readers. Natural law is not one of the issues on which they
bring the Scholastics under criticism. With safeguards of
their primary doctrines but without conscious resistance on
their part, natural law enters into the framework of their
thought and is an assumption of their political and social
teaching…. For the Reformers, as for the Fathers,
canonists, and the Scholastics, natural law stood affirmed
on the pages of Scripture.
English judge Sir William Blackstone (1723-1780) writes:
“As man depends absolutely upon his Maker for everything, it is
necessary that he should, in all points conform to his Maker’s
will. This will of his Maker is called the law of nature…. This
law of nature being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God
himself, is, of course, superior in obligation to any other. It is
binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times: no
human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of
them as are valid derive all of their force and all of their authority
mediately or immediately from this original.” ~ William
Blackstone, “Introduction”, Commentaries on the Laws of
England, sec. 2, 1:29-31.
Natural Law Theory:
Things in nature have a nature.
 Things are “bad” when they are unnatural.
 Things are “good” when they fulfill their
nature.
 People are good when they fulfill their true
nature; bad humans are those who don’t.
 Moral law is the natural law: the law that
requires us to act in accordance with our
nature.

Natural Law Theory:
“At its most basic, natural law theory tells
us that actions are right just because they
are natural, and wrong just because they
are unnatural. And people are good to the
extent that they fulfill their true nature, bad
insofar as thy flout it.” ~ Russ Shafer
Landau, The Fundamentals of Ethics, 72.
In summary:
Natural law:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Is not made by human beings;
Is based on the structure of reality;
Is the same for all human beings and at all times;
It is an unchanging rule or pattern which is there for
human beings to discover;
It is the naturally knowable moral law;
It is a means by which people everywhere (individuals
and as communities) can be enriched and rewarded.
~Adapted from John Dolhenty’s article, “An Overview of Natural Law
Theory.”
Consider:
“ We are designed to be moral.”
~ Paul R. Shockley
“We are definitely at our most peaceful
state when we adhere to natural law.”
~ Jeremy R. Poland.
Justification:
Witness of Deep Conscience;
 Witness of Cosmos (purpose; design);
 Witness of Human Design;
 Witness of Godward longings;
 Witness of Consequences.

Justification:
Consider this statement from John Dolhenty:
“It is interesting to note that virtually everyone seems to
have some knowledge of natural law even before such
knowledge is codified and formalized. Even young
children make an appeal to "fair play," demand that
things be "fair and square," and older children and adults
often apply the "golden rule." When doing so, they are
spontaneously invoking the natural law. This is why
many proponents of the natural law theory say it is the
law which is "written upon the hearts of men."
Justification:
Consider this statement from John Dolhenty:
These are examples of what is called "connatural
knowledge," that is, a knowledge which:
follows on the "lived experience" of the truth;
is the living contact of the intellect with reality itself;
is not always given expression in concepts;
may be obscure to the knower;
is overlaid with elements from the affective or feeling
side of man's nature.
Justification:
John Dolhenty goes on to say:
Now, our reflection on our own conduct gives rise to the
explicit formulation of the precepts of the natural law. We
as human beings put our "commonsense" notions of
natural law under "critical examination." In other words,
our natural impulses toward "fair play," justice, and so on
are subject to a rigorous investigation and rationalization.
And our understanding of natural law becomes more
precise as we consider and codify the principles or
precepts of natural law. The primary precept of natural
law will be the most basic principle about human action
that can be formulated.
What is the Nature of Man?
“The essential nature of man is unalterable
because it is a reflection of the unchanging
divine essence.” Rice, 52.
What is the Nature of Man?
Aquinas states:
“all those things to which man has a natural inclination are naturally
apprehended by reason as being good, and consequently as objects of
pursuit, and their contraries as evil, and objects of avoidance” [S.T., I, II,
Q. 94, art. 2] The basic inclinations of man are five:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
To seek the good, including his highest good, which is eternal
happiness with God.
To preserve himself in existence.
To preserve the species-that is, to unite sexually.
To live in community with other men.
To use his intellect and will-that is, to know the truth and to
make his own decisions.
These inclinations are put into human nature by God to help man achieve
his final end of eternal happiness. From these inclinations we apply the
natural law by deduction: Good should be done; this actions is good; this
actions therefore should be done.
What is natural law theory?

There are foundational moral principles
which are not only right for all, but at some
level known to all.

In other words, there exists ethical
standards which are the same for all,
meaning they are right for everyone; at
some level, everyone knows them.

It is natural law because it is “built into the
design of human nature and woven into
the fabric of the normal human mind; it is
genuine knowledge “written on the heart.”

Therefore, there are no moral skeptics;
supposed skeptics are playing makebelieve.
Clarifying Natural Law Theory:

Natural law is not innate for we are not
born knowing it. With the capability of
understanding we come to understand
what is meant by “murder” and by
“wrong.”

Natural law is not merely biological
instinct though it does take into account of
certain biological realities.

Natural law is not mere custom-though
customs of almost all times and places
more or less acknowledge it.

Natural law is not a law of nature in the
same sense that gravitation is a law of
nature.
Consider the following statement by Charles Rice:
“Natural law will seem mysterious if we forget
that everything has a law built into its nature.
The nature of a rock is such that it will sink if you
throw it into a pond. An automobile will function
if you feed it gasoline. If you put sand in the
tank instead, you may be sincere in your belief
that the car will run, but you will end up a
pedestrian. The natural law is the story of how
things work. If you want your body to function
well, you ought not to treat it as if it were a trash
compactor. Natural law is easy to understand
when we are talking about the physical nature.
But it applies as well to the moral sphere.”
Consider the following statement by Charles Rice:
“Morality is governed by a law built into the nature of man
and knowable by reason. Man can know, through the use
of his reason, what is in accord with his nature and
therefore good. Every law, however, has to have a
lawgiver. Let us say up front that the natural law makes no
ultimate sense without God as its author…The natural law
is a set of manufacturer’s directions written into our nature
so that we can discover through reason how we ought to
act. It ‘is nothing other can than the light of understanding
infused in us by God, whereby we understand what must
be done and what must be avoided’ [citation from Aquinas].
The Ten Commandments, and other prescriptions of the
divine law, specify some applications of that natural law.”
~ Charles Rice, 50 Questions on the Natural Law, rev. ed.,
30-31.
Consider the following statement by Charles Rice:
“Morality is governed by a law built into the nature of man
and knowable by reason. Man can know, through the use
of his reason, what is in accord with his nature and
therefore good. Every law, however, has to have a
lawgiver. Let us say up front that the natural law makes no
ultimate sense without God as its author…The natural law
is a set of manufacturer’s directions written into our nature
so that we can discover through reason how we ought to
act. It ‘is nothing other than the light of understanding
infused in us by God, whereby we understand what must
be done and what must be avoided’ [citation from Aquinas].
The Ten Commandments, and other prescriptions of the
divine law, specify some applications of that natural law.”
~ Charles Rice, 50 Questions on the Natural Law, rev. ed.,
30-31.
Clarification: What Natural Law Does Not Do:
“The natural law provides a guide through which
we can safely and rightly choose to love by God
by acting in accord with our nature and by
helping others to do the same. We can know
the requirements of the natural law through
reason unaided by explicit revelation. But,
because of the weakness and disorder caused
in our nature by original sin, we are likely to
make mistakes; So God has provided revelation
to enable to us know with certainty how we
ought to act….the natural law and revelation
compliment each other” (Ibid., 32).
Clarification: What Natural Law Does Not Do:
“There is not a natural morality and a
supernatural morality but only one salvific
morality…of which natural law morally is
existentially a part….” ~ Joseph F.
Costanzo, S.J., The Historical Credibility of
Hans Kung, 359.
Consider this quote by Pascal…
But isn’t it interesting that we care little so little
about the nature of our soul:
“The immortality of the soul is
something of such vital
importance to us, affecting us so
deeply, that one must have lost
all feeling not to care about
knowing the facts of the matter.
All our actions and thoughts must
follow such different paths,
according to whether there is
hope of eternal blessing or not,
that the only possible way of
acting with sense and judgment is
to decide our course in the light of
this point, which ought to be our
ultimate objective.” Pascal’s
Pensees, 427/194.
Clarification: What Natural Law Does Not Do:
“The natural law provides an objective standard of
right and wrong. But it is essential to distinguish
the objective wrongness of an act from the
subjective culpability, if any, of the person who
does it. Jeffrey Dahmer committed objective wrong
acts when he lured fifteen men to his Milwaukee
apartment and murdered them. The sole question
in is trial, however, was whether he was sane and
therefore culpable. The jury decided that he was
sane. John Hinkley, however, shot President
Ronald Reagan, and three others on March 30,
1981, and was found not guilty by reason of
insanity; he was committed to a mental hospital”
(Rice, 32).
Clarification: What Natural Law Does Not Do:
Rice continues:
“To be morally culpable for committing a wrong, one
must know it is wrong and yet choose to do it. The
abortionist, for example, performs actions that
objectively violate the natural law and the divine law.
But his subjective culpability may be diminished or
perhaps even eliminated (or increased) by
circumstances. In general, the culpability is not ours
to judge. The presence of absence of subjective
culpability, however, cannot change the objective
rightness or wrongness of the act: the act either is or
not in keeping with the Manufacturer’s directions
written in our nature” (Ibid., 33).
Clarification: What Natural Law Does Not Do:
“The distinction between yes and no, true and
false, good and evil, cannot be given up unless
men want to give up being human.”
~ Walter Kasper, Transcending All
Understanding: The Meaning of Christian Faith
Today, 41.
Aquinas: 4 Kinds of Law:

Aquinas defines “law” in general as “an
ordinance of reason for the common good,
made by him who has care of the community,
and promulgated.”

The four kinds of law are:




The Eternal Law;
The Natural Law;
The Human Law;
The Divine Law.
The Eternal Law:

It is God’s “plan” for the world.

Flowing from God who is eternal and timeless,
there is a “universal rational orderliness” that is
“characteristic of the whole universe.”

The whole community of the universe is
governed by God, the ruler of the Universe.

St. Augustine described it as “the reason or the
will of God, who commands us to respect the
natural order and forbids us to disturb it.”
The Natural Law:

All things partake somewhat of the eternal law.

“[The] light of natural reason, whereby we discern what
is good and what is evil, which is the function of the
natural law, is nothing else than an imprint on us of the
Divine Light. It is therefore evident that the natural law is
nothing else than the rational creature’s participation of
the Divine Law.” ~ Aquinas, S.T. I, II, Q. 91, art 2.

The first, self-evident precept of the natural law is that
“good is to be done and pursued, and evil is to be
avoided. All other precepts of the natural law are based
on this self-evident law.
The Human Law:

Since the eternal law is the plan of
government in the Chief Governor, all the
plans of government, in the inferior
governors must be derived from the
eternal law.
The Divine Law:
The Scriptures. Besides the natural and
human it was necessary for the directing
of human conduct to have Divine Law: The
Old and New Testament.
Thus, the divine law compliments the
natural law.
Divine Law Compliments Natural & Human law.
“It is necessary for man to accept by faith not only things
which are above reason, but also those which can be
known by reason: and this for three motives. First, in
order that man may arrive more quickly at the knowledge
of Divine truth…. Second,... In order that the knowledge of
God may be more general. For many are unable to make
progress in the study of science, either through dullness of
mind, or through having a number of occupations and
temporal needs, or even through laziness in learning, all of
whom would be altogether deprived of the knowledge of
God, unless Divine things were brought to their knowledge
under the guise of faith.”
He goes on to say…
Divine Law Compliments Natural & Human law.
“The third reason is for the sake of certitude. For
human reason is very deficient in things
concerning God. A sign of this is that
philosophers in their researches, by natural
investigation, into human affairs, have fallen into
many errors, and have disagreed among
themselves. And consequently, in order that
mean might have knowledge of God, free of doubt
and uncertainty, it was necessary for divine
matters to be delivered to them by way of faith,
being told to them, as it is were, by God Himself
Who cannot lie” [S.T., II, II, Q. 1, art. 4].
Consider the following from Aquinas:
“[As to] certain most general precepts that are known to
all,… the natural law, in the abstract, can nowise be
blotted out from men’s hearts. [However, the natural law]
is blotted out in the case of a particular action, in so far
as reason is hindered from applying the general principle
to a particular point of practice, on account of
concupiscence or some other passion…. But as to the
other, i.e., the secondary precepts, the natural law can
be blotted out from the human heart, either by evil
persuasions, just as in speculative matters errors occur
in respect of necessary conclusions; or by vicious
customs and corrupt habits, as among some men, theft,
and even unnatural vices, as the Apostle states (Rom. i),
were not esteemed sinful.” ~ S.T., I, II, Q. 94, art. 6.
Consider the following from Rice:
“ A person can so dull his conscience with
repeated sin that he will no longer
acknowledge that what he is doing is
wrong. As Saint Thomas said, “Through
sin, the reason is obscured, especially in
practical matters, the will hardened to evil,
good actions become more difficult, and
concupiscence [yearning of the soul for
the good] more impetuous.”
Comparison:

Aquinas’ System of Laws:

The integration of natural
and human laws with the
eternal and divine laws.

Enlightenment:

Operates entirely on the
basis of human law-even if
the affirm natural law.

Secular and humanistic,
without reliance on God and
His revelation, divorcing man
from God’s precepts, leaves
man entirely on his own.

Yet, there is angst, because
no man can actually free
himself from God and from
himself as He is designed by
God. Can Man Really Live
Apart from God?
Natural Law Theory:

The “conscience” is the
pedagogue to the soul
(teacher).

Judaism, Origen, and
Aquinas say that all ten of
the Commandments (the
Decalogue) are in some
sense self-evident. Modern
Christian scholars such as
J. Budziszewski defend this
view.
Conscience

We know that we are to pursue good
and avoid evil because natural law is
written on the heart (prescriptive, not
descriptive).

We have the ability to tell right from
wrong.

We can violate natural law, but when
we do, we personally suffer (e.g.,
guilt).
Next Time…
More on Natural Law;
 Aquinas’ four cardinal virtues;
 Introduction to Kant’s Categorical
Imperative.
