Understanding Natural Law Theory and Moral Principles
Natural Law theory is based on the idea that the good aligns with fundamental design, prescribing moral behavior. Rooted in Aristotle's teleological view, it encompasses concepts like Aquinas' hierarchy of laws and natural inclinations. Qualifying principles such as the Doctrine of Double-Effect guide moral decision-making, evaluating actions based on intentions and consequences.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Morality and Human Nature Natural Law Theory Based upon assumption that the good is consistent with fundamental design Not the laws of nature, those laws are descriptive Moral laws prescriptive in that they tell us how we ought to behave Historical Origins: Aristotle (through Aquinas) An observer of Nature His teleological view provides a conclusion about human good
Aquinas Hierarchy Eternal Law The law of God s regulative reason Natural Law That part of God s Law that is incorporated into human nature Divine Law The Law that man receives by special revelation from God Human Law Law devised by man for specific purposes
Natural Inclinations Life Natural inclination to self-preservation Procreation Natural inclination to reproduce Knowledge Natural inclination to learn Sociability Natural inclination to love and seek affection
Qualifying Principles Principle of Forfeiture A person who threatens the life of an innocent person forfeits his own right to life Principle or Doctrine of Double Effect Distinguishes between the intended and the foreseen but unintended consequences of actions
Doctrine of Double-Effect It is permissible to perform an act that will have bad effects only if: The act is good in itself The bad effect is unavoidable The intention of the actor is good The bad effect(s) are not part of the purpose The good effect is sufficiently good to compensate for the bad effect Key point are: intentions and avoidability
Applying Double-Effect Not Intended Yes No Yes Is the bad effect the means of producing the good effect? Is the act permissible? Is the bad effect avoidable? Is the bad effect proportionate? Passes Yes No Yes No Intended Not permissible - Forbidden
Evaluating Natural Law Theory Determination of actions is a result of seeing moral law in human nature Can the way things are by nature provide a basis for knowing how they ought to be? Chance, direction, and the purpose of life
Virtue Ethics Focuses on the character of the moral agent performing the action Intentions will be an important consideration but will not be the only consideration Consequences may also be important Principles may also be important According to virtue ethics, an action is right if and only if it is what a moral agent with a virtuous character would do in those circumstances
Aristotle on the Virtues Believed that the ultimate good for man was eudaimonia (i.e., living a fulfilling, satisfying life) Believed a person had to develop in themself certain virtues of character, in order to achieve eudaimonia Virtues included courage, self-restraint, justice, temperance, honesty, benevolence, love of knowledge, generosity, etc. Most important virtue was phronesis, practical wisdom, which guided one as to when particular virtues were appropriately displayed
Two Types of Virtue Intellectual virtues represent excellences in reasoning skills that can be taught through inquiry and study. Moral virtues, by contrast, are products of habit that begin in childhood and are strengthened in adult life.
The Golden Mean Aristotle also spoke of the importance of The Golden Mean Essentially states that each virtue should be displayed at an appropriate level: not too little, not too much Too little courage is cowardice, too much courage is recklessness Lack of honesty is a vice, but being too honest is also a vice
Every science, investigation or action aims at some good. Such good exists in a hierarchy, with the lesser goods being instrumental in the seeking of higher goods, but many things are good in and of themselves. The highest good will be the final goal of purposeful striving, something good for its own sake. For humans this good is eudaimonia (happiness/flourishing), which is always an end in itself. The ar te (excellence/virtue) of anything resides in its proper function. The proper function of human beings, and therefore their moral excellence (ar te), resides in the active life of the rational element. Therefore, the good for human beings is an activity of the soul in conformity with excellence/virtue. Such a life necessarily involves acting in accordance with reason. To act in accordance with reason is a matter of observing the principle of the mean relative to us, i.e. finding the appropriate response between excess and deficiency in a particular situation. The traditional virtues, e.g. courage, all fit within this scheme
Virtue ethics is not concerned so much with actions or duties as with the development of character. The development of a proper character is what will lead to proper action, not simply conformity to some rule or duty. Thus virtue ethics concerns itself more with being the type of individual who will make proper moral decisions rather than with defining rules/duties which will direct action independent of the individual who is faced with a moral decision.
Contemporary Virtue Ethics Virtue Theory revived in late 20th century due to dissatisfaction with consequentialist and deontological theories Universalizes virtue as the basis of the theory All moral agents should seek to develop a virtuous character Right action is based upon what a person with a virtuous character would do in those circumstances Correct answers to moral problems can only be obtained through understanding of the virtues Consequences and principles are merely tools to aid the moral agent
William Frankena A Critique of Virtue-Based Ethics principles without traits are impotent and traits without principles are blind Virtue ethics defines traits of character that we admire, but cannot provide a satisfactory explanation for why we should admire those specific traits over others.
Continued. Principles without dispositions toward action are likewise without teeth. Frankena sees the two approaches as complementary, rather than competitive
