• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Critically examine what is meant by natural moral law.

Extracts from this document...


Critically examine what is meant by natural moral law The doctrine of natural law has its deepest foundations from Greek philosopher Aristotle but upholds the strongest dictation in the writings of Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274). The underlying ethical basis of Roman Catholicism also stems from his writings based around the premise that God created all things 'good'. This includes man, the highest aspect of his creation of whom he made in his own image; "Then God said: "let us make man in our own image, in our likeness, let them (man and women) rule over the fish in the sea the birds in the air, over livestock, over all earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground". One of the major aspects of natural law is the concept that everything and everyone is made with a predetermined purpose. And the starting point of all advocates of natural law is to work out this purpose akin to human life. Following ones rationale, Aquinas claims, leads us to a realisation of our 'purpose'- reason is used to find out Gods intention and the purpose of human existence and this will enable one to arrive at the principles of natural law. Focusing firstly on the word 'natural', it is synonymous with reason. Contrary to what one may assume 'natural' does not mean our natural predispositions or inclinations but rather mans ability to reason. In fact natural law is founded upon mans ability to reason. Aquinas considered that natural law was the moral code which humans are naturally inclined towards. ...read more.


If ones gift is to teach then teach....and so one. The problem is of course what happens when one thinks their eschatology is that of an ' apparent good'? They might consider that their personal goals are that of power or like the suicide bombers think that their eschatology is to end their live ion aid of attacking the enemy. Obviously here we have a perversion of ones eschatology. Natural law claims that reason illustrates to us their limitations. 'Apparent goods' are destructive to one and others and disgrace or degrade man. So the question arises that why do so many of us follow an 'apparent good'? Aquinas would argue that it is in opens weak nature that it is far easier to follow what one desires and gets pleasure out of, and once tempted, one is stuck in the intoxication. 2) analyse and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of natural law as a definitive ethical theory. The premise of natural law states that morality is based on reason alone, but surely if we look around us it is actually based on our emotions? David Hume (1713-1776) was a philosopher that disagreed with the notion that morality is based on reason alone. As we have seen, Aquinas believed that natural law was synonymous with mans reason; Hume powerfully argued that if this is so then why do people have such a diverse perception of what is right and wrong, good and bad? Surely if morality is reason based then we would all have the same ideas of what is good and bad? ...read more.


There is a desire to believe in something beyond bodily death. The existence of so many religions seem to prove this point. It could be looked upon like this; are we, as Sartre says condemned to be free, or does existence really have an underlying purpose and meaning? Like I mentioned earlier, we now live in a secular age. However we cant seem to get away from 'god' or 'gods'. We basically invent gods like science and medicine. Surely this seems to indicate that our existence requires some foundation beyond our own means? In regards to 'apparent goods' Aquinas claims that they are self destructive despite the 'miracle' cures of modern society. The questions arises that will society ever create an earthly paradise where all pleasures are catered for. Will we ever make the 'paradise' that temps us away from reasoning or will we find that it's not enough. It would be that if paradise can never be created then it reinforces the idea of 'apparent goods' In conclusion I would be inclined not to follow natural law. Although it raises many valuable and appraisable points (after all it does strive for what's moral) I feel as though it is far too orthodox and strict for my liking. It seems to have too much of Aquinas's desires and seems irrelevant for today's society. As a definitive ethical theory I suggest that it doesn't uphold what I would determine or expect a definitive ethical theory to be. I feel it has too many gaps that have un suggestive answers, the fact that it hasn't made me feel as though I can relate to it as a moral theory says it all. Hannah Hawker Religious Studies- Ethics 29/11/2002 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Practical Questions section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Practical Questions essays

  1. Discuss the Relationship between law and morals. Consider how far the law seeks to ...

    The political and moral movements in society are often reflected in legal change. A good example of this can be seen in legislation that prohibited and controlled private sexual behaviour. The Wolfenden Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution explored and made recommendations on important areas of adult life.

  2. Religious Studies - Ethics: Natural Moral Law

    This belief opposes the Protestant viewpoint where emphasis is put on scripture and revelation. Aquinas thought that human nature is essentially good and are generally drawn to what is good and right, however, he accepted that it was possible for humans to be mislead into following an 'apparent good' rather than a real good.

  1. To what extent would a follower of Natural Law allow euthanasia?

    of ensoulment and some people would use this to argue that some terminally ill cannot be classed as full people anymore, so therefore have the right to die. As vegetable souls do not have sanctity of life, it can be argued that euthanasia would be acceptable according to Natural Law.

  2. Natural Law

    Other criticisms include the fact that Natural Law suggests humans should aim to get married and have children which would mean that those who devote their lives to something else, such as charity or developing a cure for a disease, would be wrong in how they chose to have lived their life.

  1. Assess the strengths and weaknesses of Natural Law.

    However, the weaknesses of natural law are equally apparent, the largest of which being the 'Naturalistic Fallacy'. This theory suggests that we should apply information obtained through scientific observation, what life ' is' like, to how we ' ought' to behave.

  2. Analyse and evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of natural moral law as a definitive ...

    to pro-creation, but perhaps for those involved they find love and purpose in life through expression of their sexuality. This example serves to highlight the suggestion that perhaps what is 'natural' differs depending upon circumstances. In their book The Puzzle of Ethics Peter Vardy and Paul Grosch challenge the way in which Aquinas works from general principles to lesser purposes.

  1. RE euthanasia for and against

    People think that if we legalise euthanasia, we will ultimately fall into the trap of involuntary euthanasia and doctors will have lots of power over our fate. It is not possible to register every act of euthanasia voluntary, as there would be some cases of involuntary where the patient has their destiny decided for them.

  2. Natural Moral Law - in theory and in practice.

    However if it has a selfish or wrong intention then the action is not justifiable. He believed that all humans should act selflessly and virtuously in order to flourish and live a moral life. For example; giving to charity should not have a bad intention such as to seek attention.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work