Free Essay

Explain How a Follower of Natural Law Theory Might Approach the Issue Surrounding Abortion.

In: Philosophy and Psychology

Submitted By valexjo98
Words 2221
Pages 9
a) Explain how a follower of Natural Law theory might approach the issue surrounding abortion.

The Natural Law Theory has developed over time since the era of the ancient Greeks, and it is not necessarily based on one single theory. Natural law is the belief that God has created the universe to work in certain ways. The structure of Natural Law is not accidental; it is deliberate and has important implications to the human race (this can also be used to argue the existence of God in the teleological argument). Humans have a duty to conform to Natural Law. If they do not conform it is morally bad.

St Thomas Aquinas linked his idea of Natural Law with Aristotle’s view that people have a specific nature, purpose and function. Aristotle said that not only does everything have a purpose, but also it achieves supreme good when it fulfill its purpose. Aristotle stated that the supreme good for humans is to achieve happiness, which can be related to mill’s utilitarianism where our aim is to gain happiness by avoiding pain and gaining pleasure, but Aristotle did not follow the consequentialist nature of utilitarianism. Aristotle said we were to achieve the final goal by living a life of reason based on what we experience, and this follows the deontological nature of Kantian ethics. Aquinas said that humans beings have an essential rational nature given by God in order for us to live and flourish, even without God reason can discover laws that lead to human flourishing, this is why it is also accepted by atheist. Aquinas also said that Natural Law is universal and should be used to judge laws of particular societies.

In this theory we have primary precepts and secondary precepts. Primary precepts are fundamental principles revealed to us by God. Aquinas applied these to everyone without exception. The primary precepts are; the preservation of life; reproduction; the nurture and education of the young; living peacefully in society; to worship God. These precepts are always true and there is no exception. Then we have secondary precepts, which are dependent on our own judgment of what we would do in a certain situation, and are open to faulty reasoning. Secondary precepts require the use of reasoning and experience. You must use the secondary precepts to keep the primary precepts in order for humanity to flourish. If we were to look at the primary precept of the preservation of life, abortion for example would not be acceptable.

Natural Law does not consider unknown consequences but it is the action itself in which is wrong. When we look at abortion and look at the situations through Natural Law, we realize that we should never take part in abortion. Just like Christianity, Natural Law looks at human life as though it is sacred, so in cases of rape and incest, the mother will have to give birth to the child. Another one of the primary precept to Natural Law is to protect the innocent. The unborn child will have no choice in the matter so therefore it must be protected.

When the mother’s life is at risk we can look at this through different angels within Natural Law. Abortion would not be an option if the fetus were to be harmed so the choice would be for the mother to pass and the child to be born as we are protecting the innocent in this case. Utilitarians would agree because they will measure someone’s life through the hedonic calculus and the more years a person has to live, the more good he could achieve, even though this is based entirely on prediction. However, if we were looking at an ectopic pregnancy, both the mother and the fetus will die. If we were to look at the double effect, there is still a way in which to save the mother. Abortion is still considered an evil act, so that is not an option to keep in mind but there is another way. If we look at the situation where our motive is to save the mother, a rightful act would be to cut the fallopian tube, the act is just as it is not technically an abortion, and we have preserved the life of the mother.

It is important in Natural Law that we do not let our desire or our emotions come into play (just like is Kantian ethics), and we need to based our decisions on pure reason. When it is life threatening to the mother, the mother must choose to let her child live or to stay alive and not let her feeling towards her family or her life goals get in the way of preserving and protecting her innocent child’s potential life. If you were to agree to have an abortion you may see it as a clean choice as you will have the chance to have another child and be able to live a longer life, but this is not real good. This is known as apparent good. Another example of apparent Good can be committing adultery, you may see it as good, as no one is getting hurt and there is only pleasure to gain as long as your spouse does not find out, but it is not real good as you are betraying your partner and if they were to figure out that you are having an affair all that can come from that is pain and suffering. In the case of abortion the real good would be to allow the child to be born as you are conforming to two of the primary precepts.

If we are to go down a virtuous path when it comes to abortion, we must take caution, circumspection, foresight, ingenuity, memory, passivity, reason and understanding and all of this will fall under duty. As a follower of Natural Law your duty is to follow the primary precepts, and in the case of abortion we must preserve human life and protect the innocent so the virtuous path would be to not commit abortion.

Overall Natural Law does not agree with abortion. As followers of Natural Law are to preserve life and protect the innocent, abortion is not an option. In ectopic pregnancy if our motive is to preserve the mothers life it is right to cut the fallopian tube and it is not technically and abortion. The main thing in is to follow the primary precepts, which will lead human life to flourish.

b) Natural Law has no serious weaknesses. Discuss.

Natural Law has a large number of strengths and weaknesses. One of the main strengths must be its universal application. Natural Law will give you the basic moral approach to living a good life no matter the culture or society as the purpose of morality to humans is the fulfillment of our natures. This will connect all monotheistic religions. Consequently, major monotheistic religions have similar view on complex matters such as abortion and euthanasia due to Aquinas’ Natural Law. The universal application strength can also be supported through Kant’s categorical imperative, where we must act as if the action we are to commit would be acceptable if all humans are to do the same. Jesus’ Golden rule also supports the strength along with J.S Mill’s although an atheist, he agreed that Jesus’ Golden rule is the kernel to morality.

What we could say that would go against this strength is that there is no common human nature, there is no common culture, and there is no common approach to complex matters such as abortion and euthanasia. This would destroy its universal application as different cultures may interpret nature is different ways such as in the Amazonian tribe the Suruwahá. They would bury a disabled child alive, as they believe it has no soul. This of course goes against Aquinas’ Natural Law as he states that all life is precious and we must protect the innocent. Kia Neilsen supports the argument that there is no single human nature common to all societies by saying that for example; some of us may have changeable natures such as not all men born on this earth may be heterosexual.

Another strength of Natural Law can be that it does not dictate what you should do in certain situations. The primary precepts are general but must be followed; you still have the choice to act on your own accord as long as you follow the primary precepts. We can argue that Natural Law does not allow us free will. This is because Natural Law forbids certain acts such as Abortion. If we look at ectopic pregnancy, we need to find a way around it to commit abortion without actually naming it an abortion, if we were to cut the fallopian tube, people will still see it as an abortion due to the fetus dying through man intervention.

In order for Natural Law to work we must identify what is good. According to G.R Moore this goes against the naturalistic fallacy. He argues that the notion of goodness is unanalyzable and unnatural so it cannot be defined by any reference to nature. Aquinas argues the humans are social animals and it is part of our nature to want to live peacefully in the company of others. As caring for others in a righteous act and is in our nature it must be good. Moore will then say ‘ you cannot derive an ought from an is’ which means that even though we may be naturally inclined to care for other does not mean we ought to.

Karl Barth thinks that Natural Law depends too much on reason and that humans cannot be trusted as their nature can be corrupt. He also states that we do not depend enough on the grace of God and the revelation in the Bible. This criticism can be put down, as Natural Law is the moral law in which God has built into our nature. Followers of Natural Law do depend on authority; they depend on God for guidance and to influence us in our moral behavior. Karl Barth may be looking too much at the Kantian influence on Natural Law and religion ethics. Yes, follower of Natural Law and religious ethics are to base their actions on pure reason, but we also take into consideration the known consequences that can be achieved. Kant says that we do not need an authority figure where as in Natural Law and religion ethics says we do. Our authority Figure in Natural Law is God, he has given us the moral Laws. Karl Barth may be concerned with the secondary precepts where we use reason to justify our actions, but there is nothing to be concerned about as long as our actions justify the primary precepts and we are to commit real good.

Peter Vardy argues that the general moral laws in Natural Law are too broad to apply to specific personal situations. We can argue against this criticism by saying that although it can be a challenge to narrow the broadness of the law, it can still be applied as long as the primary precepts are followed. If we take the question ‘ should more money be spent on schools rather than on hospitals?’ it seems that Natural Law will not be ale to justify either side. This question concerns two of the primary precepts, the preservation of life, and protection of the innocent. In school we educate our children to protect them from falling into debt, or peer pressure, to gain qualifications in order to achieve a stable job, which can protect them from a bad life and welcome in a good life. In hospitals we save the life of young children and pensioners in order to preserve their life. As no primary precept is worth more than the other, the answer would be to spend equal amount of money in both areas.

Some scholars argue that Natural Law may not work as they think it is that you must follow what come naturally to you. If you are in a situation where anger arises and your instincts tell you to conform your anger with violence, you must do so as it comes naturally to you, this of course does not justify goodness. What Aquinas may say to revive his theory is that Natural Law is not about what comes to us naturally but nature interpreted by human reason.

Overall I do not think there is a serious weakness to Natural Law. Most criticisms can be answered rationally. The main criticism that I think is the strongest must be the taking away of free will. Free will is a gift given to us from God, it would be wrong to say that we are forbidden to commit acts such as abortion or active euthanasia. Natural Law is a happy balance between deontological and teleological theories as it looks at known consequences and pure reason. I agree with Aquinas’ Natural Law, I think if we are to live a just life as humans, the primary precepts are essential. My response to the argument of free will is that although it is forbidden to commit abortion, there is nothing physically stopping us to proceed with the action so the essence of free will is still there.…...

Similar Documents

Free Essay

Natural Law Theory and Virtue Ethics

...Moral reasoning using natural law theory and virtue ethics One of the primary debates in ethics is not whether a certain action is right or wrong, as most can agree that acts such as murder are not ethically right, but in what specific situations that these actions become permissible. There are certain absolutist views that determine an action is right or wrong, despite any extraneous circumstances; however, many moral reasoning ethics fall into a grey area where certain acts that would normally be considered wrong are justified in certain conditions. The natural law theory, along with its doctrine of double effect, and Aristotle’s virtue ethics both fall into the aforementioned category of moral ethics. Natural law theory originated from the religious view that a human’s ability to reason sets them apart as higher beings, and with such reasoning we have the responsibility to follow the righteous path set forth for our lives, “to do good and avoid evil”.1 In this manner, a certain act cannot be justified or viewed as “good” because it leads to the satisfaction of desire, setting natural law theory far apart from utilitarianism ethics. The principals laid out by the natural law theory gave birth to the doctrine of double effect, which is the belief that many acts may have both a good and a bad effect. The Catholic Church defends that some acts that would normally be considered immoral may be justified under three distinct conditions: the act itself is not intrinsically......

Words: 1014 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

Natural Law Theory and Gays

...Essay 1 A Natural Law theorist would argue that homosexuality is unnatural because it goes against four common definitions of the word unnatural. The Natural Law theorist would argue that homosexuality goes against the descriptive laws of nature, it is artificially produced by humans, anything uncommon is unnatural, and that any use of an organ that it contrary to its purposed use is unnatural. Leiser believes that these contentions to homosexuality being a natural phenomenon do not sufficiently explain why homosexuality is unnatural. Leiser believes that homosexuality does not go against the descriptive laws of nature because these laws are meant to describe behavior, not prescribe it. (Leiser p. 56) Leiser gives the example of the law of nature that says that water boils at 212 degree Fahrenheit. This law does not tell the water that this is what it has to do, but simply describes a natural phenomenon. In fact, if any of these descriptive laws is broken, then it cannot be considered a law at all. (Leiser p. 56) With regards to the contention that homosexuality is unnatural because it is artificially produced by humans, Leiser refers to his typewriter. He explains that man had to remove certain substances from nature and put them together using a variety of chemical and mechanical processes to create his typewriter. With this, he argues that the logic that would lead someone to believe that this is a reason for thinking that homosexuality is unnatural would lead someone...

Words: 599 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Marxist Theory of State, and How It Might Be Criticised

...ESSAY – ‘What is the Marxist theory of the state and how might it be criticised?’ Introduction Marxism first arose in 1987 when Marx and Engels were commissioned to write the manifesto for the political party of radical workers, The Communist League; this political party was formed in order to create a unity of the ‘working men’, in favour of the creation of a classless society. The purpose of The Communist Manifesto, and much of Marx’s early writings on the state, was to promote social change, in refutation to Hegel’s theory of the dialetic. This is achieved through the construction of a materialist interpretation of the state as ‘the active, conscious and official expression (of) the present structure of society' (Collected Works, 3, p. 199). Marx’s ultimate aim was to “lay bare the economic law of motion of modern society.” (Marx, Capital [1867] 1965, p10), which is to… This essay will explain and analyse Marx’s theory of state, a nd assess the legitimacy of the theory through criticisms. Marx’s theory of history/state: History is a study of past events in human affairs; Marx believes that historical events are driven forward by changing economic factors within the ‘base’ of society. According to Marx, human society is made up of two measures: a base and a superstructure. The superstructure is the set of 'non-economic institutions whose character is explained by the nature of the economic structure (the base).' (G. A. Cohen Karl Marx's Theory of History: A Defence pp......

Words: 1749 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

‘a Relativist Approach to the Issues Raised by Abortion Leads to Wrong Moral Choices.’ Discuss.

...‘A relativist approach to the issues raised by abortion leads to wrong moral choices.’ Discuss. One could indeed present the argument that a relativist approach to abortion could lead to the wrong moral choices. For example, in subjective ethical relativism, although one may be able to make a moral choice completely by themselves, there are no clear guidelines in which they have to adhere to. This may lead to corruptible behaviour, as people might delude themselves into thinking certain things that are wrong; are in fact right. Additionally, conventional ethical relativism, which considers society’s values, would most likely disregard the needs of the individual, rendering them to feel pressured by society to follow cultural tradition. This may lead to the wrong moral choice being made. For example if a woman would mentally suffer with the pregnancy, but is not allowed an abortion (such as in Uganda), this would be the wrong moral decision that has resulted from a conventional relativist approach to ethics. On the other hand, a relativist approach could also lead to the correct moral choices. For example, subjectivism allows the individual to make their own choice, which ultimately can be regarded as a good thing. Only the mother herself can really know if she wants an abortion, or if she would not be able to cope with the pregnancy both mentally and physically. A relativist approach to abortion allows for the individuals needs and circumstance to be considered,......

Words: 330 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

Natural Law

...1) Explain Natural Law Theory. Natural Law refers to the laws of nature; it is also the basis of all science, observing what happened in nature, it is also a law that stretches across all cultures and ways of life. It is based on the religious idea of a God who creates everything with a purpose and end in the mind. Natural Law ethics is part of natural theology that tells us how God wants us to live here and now. To live according to natural law is to live by Gods intentions ethical direction can be found in what is common to all humans. If we follow these common dispositions then we act as God intended= we act in a good way. If we investigate carefully and reason correctly our search will lead to God. This is the basic of natural Theology. Natural law becomes more specific when we move towards secondary principles such as the 10 commandments (secondary law). They are always valid but we should not act upon them. Natural law is split up into 4 channels which are: Eternal Law- Is the mind of God which humans cannot know. Contained within it are the laws which govern the creation of the universe and cannot control the life cycle of everything in existence. Although humans cannot fully know the Eternal law, they can occasionally glimpse reflection of it, for example, through scientific knowledge of aspects of natural law. This shows that God is the starting point, his idea, his rules. He reveals himself threw divine law. God is also thinking about creating a world. We......

Words: 1566 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Natural Law Theory Defended

...Wednesday, October 29, 2008 PHIL 3516 Professor R. Debes Natural Law Theory Defended One may pose the question; what is Natural Law Theory? To answer that question I would like to take a look at our book. Thomas Aquinas says this, “[Now] the first principle in practical matters, which are the object of the practical reason, is the last end: and the last end of human life is happiness or beatitude…. Consequently, law must… concern itself mainly with the order that is in beatitude. Moreover, since every part is ordained to the whole as the imperfect to the perfect, and since one man is a part of the perfect community, law must… concern itself properly with the order directed to universal happiness. Therefore Aristotle mentions both happiness and the body politic, since he says that we call those legal matters just which are adapted to produce and preserve happiness and its parts for the body politic.” (Q90) He goes on to say, “Thus,… Law is nothing else than an ordinance of reason for the common good, promulgated by him who has the care of the community. The natural law is promulgated by the very fact that God instilled it into man’s mind so as to be known by him naturally…. The promulgation that takes place in the present extends to future time by reason of the durability of written characters, by which means it is continually promulgated.” (Q90) Simplified we can take a few things from this excerpt such as that Natural Law is instilled in us by God, and directs......

Words: 1422 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Explain the Theory of Natural Law

...Explain the theory of Natural Law (25) The world has a set of moral laws that are part of the fabric world. Natural Law is that the laws of morality parallel the laws of the physical world and is a theory that stretches across all cultures and ways of life. It is a universal and deontological theory that says there are definite rights and wrongs. This Natural Law exists to assist humans to direct their actions in such a way that they may reach their eternal density with God. There is a Natural Law for the physical world and the moral world that is discoverable through observation. The theory of Natural Law was created by Thomas Aquinas, who built his theory on key ideas from Ancient Greeks, in particular The Stoics and Aristotle. Amongst the Stoics teachings was the fact that the universe had a rational and purposeful order; to live in accordance with the universes order one had to follow Natural Law. This meant when making laws, they should be made and developed so that they correspond to nature of the universe. Aquinas taught, on ideas based on Aristotle that good person is someone who fulfils their purpose, meaning acting in accordance to Natural law. Aquinas believed that God had put inclinations in each human to behave in certain was; following our inclinations will lead us to the highest good and fulfil our purpose. The most basic and fundamental inclination that a person has is to do good and avoid evil. This brings about the question of: what actually is good and......

Words: 940 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Explain the Main Principles of the Natural Law Approach to Ethics.

...Natural Law is an absolutist theory because it doesn’t vary its primary precepts with circumstances. Natural law is a mixture of teleological and deontological because it has primary precepts which are to do with duty, and secondary which apply to circumstances. Thomas Aquinas based Natural Law on Aristotle’s teaching about causality. In Aristotle Final cause and purpose are important when trying to give an explanation of a thing. Eg. the final cause of a knife is to cut. Aristotle thought this is what made a good knife. Something is good inasmuch as it fulfills its purpose. (The most important cause is the final cause which when achieved by an object it reaches perfection – because it has moved from potentiality to actuality eg. a potential A grade student becomes an actual one through application of hard work. ) The contrast with other senses of the word good can be brought out if we consider that a good knife can be used to perform a bad deed – ie. to stab a person. However, if it cut cleanly it would be good in the sense of doing what it was made for. This use of the word good is taken up in Aquinas and used in his theory. What is clear for a knife is not so clear for humans – what is our purpose? Ultimately, God Himself is the final purpose of human beings – our goals are not merely temporal, but eternal, because we have an immortal soul. However, we also have temporal purposes, which could be summarised as to live and flourish in certain ways discoverable by......

Words: 656 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Evaluate a Utilitarian Approach to Abortion.

...Abortion, the deliberate termination of a pregnancy, has been the subject of discussion and controversy for many decades. Utilitarianism is the chief teleological ethical theory today which considers the consequences of an action; such as abortion. This ethical approach to abortion is useful because it determines that “an action is right if it produces the greatest good for the greatest number”. It considers the hedonic calculus, designed by Bentham, which weighs up the pleasure and pain generated by the available moral actions; the theory mainly focuses on both pleasure and pain and the ability to maximize pleasure over pain. It also emphasises the ends of abortion over its means; so it judges the rightness of abortion by the end result, possible pleasure, it produces. The views of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill are significant in illustrating the effects of a Utilitarian approach to abortion. Firstly, Bentham’s version of utilitarianism, known as Act utilitarianism, is the most relevant theory to the issue of abortion. His theory remains teleological, using the outcome of an action to determine whether it is good or bad. With abortion being a personal issue, it seems that act utilitarianism is the most adequate theory because it looks at the consequences of an abortion, taking each situation into separate account of all others. This would then enable women who have been raped, for example, to choose whether they go ahead with the birth because they may not be able to...

Words: 1333 - Pages: 6

Free Essay

Explain How Natural Law Theory Can Be Used to Decide the Right Moral Action

...Explain how Natural Law theory can be used to decide the right moral action [25] Natural law is an absolutist theory which is most commonly associated with Thomas Aquinas. It mainly relies on Aquinas’ theory that humans try to do good things and try to avoid evil in order to find fulfilment and happiness in life. However, according to Aquinas there are two types of good. There is the real good and the apparent good. The ‘real good’ is something that genuinely leads us to fulfil our purpose and achieve perfection. And the ‘apparent good’ is something that only appears good to us but it isn’t genuinely good. For example, a real good would be to study and revise for exams, whereas an apparent good would be to enjoy ourselves by watching television. We might think the second option is the real good for us but it’s the apparent good as we are not really benefiting from it. Aquinas is arguing that for a person to be happy, they must do good actions which can be one of the two types of good. He is also arguing that if humans do evil, they will be lead to the path of unhappiness. This could be interpreted as our actions determine the extent of happiness in our lives. This is known as the Synderesis Rule. Natural law in itself is based on five primary precepts which were, according to Aquinas, revealed to us by God. In defining the Primary Precepts, Aquinas was stating 'self-evident principles' that are universal and absolute - they are part of our very nature as humans, this sounds...

Words: 591 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Natural Law Theory

...Natural Law Theory & Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics, & Recent Theories of Rights: Rawls & Nozick. Natural Law Theory: Natural Law theory in ethics is not to be confused with the laws of nature as put forward by physicists or other natural scientists, but they are related and do overlap. In moral domains, we are not concerned to give a mathematical, experimentally based theory of ethics or justice, but we are concerned with the general order of nature and how human life is nestled in and depends on that order. For example, life (& its preservation) depends on observing the necessities and limitations of nature, how we are dependent on food, shelter, parents and a community and the satisfying of other natural needs for life to exist, continue and prosper. The most prominent philosophers & political thinkers in this line of thought include the following: ancient - Plato, Aristotle, & later Cicero & other Roman statesmen; medieval - St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas & other thinkers in the Judeo-Christian tradition; modern - John Locke, & of course Thomas Jefferson & the “founding fathers” of the American republic. According to almost all of these authors, the natural order ultimately depends upon a first ordering principle that established the relation between man and nature. That first principle is commonly referred to as God or Creator, as indicated, for example, in the opening of Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence. One line of reasoning introduced by Plato is......

Words: 3180 - Pages: 13

Free Essay

Explain Natural Law

...Part A) Explain, with examples, Aquinas’ theory of Natural Law (25 Marks) The theory of natural law has been around for over 2000 years. Natural law believes that every person/thing has a purpose. It is an absolutist law; this is because the rules are set for everyone and need to be followed at all times. It is also deontological as natural law defines what is right and gives us moral rules. Aristotle believed humans were born into knowing how to act morally, as it was written within us. Aristotle believed that if people would follow laws it would lead to eudemonia. Aquinas was heavily influenced by Aristotle’s belief that all people served a purpose. Aquinas went on to believe that all of us have a ‘god given’ purpose. Soon enough Aquinas had created natural law. Natural law was influenced by Aristotle and created by Thomas Aquinas. Natural law is the idea that there is a natural order to the world that should be obeyed. This is determined by God. God made us with a purpose; natural law directs us on the purposes that we need to fulfil and natural law can be applied universally. Aquinas stated that there were four types of law: Eternal law, the perfect, complete set of God’s law that had created the universe. Humans have only partial knowledge of this. Divine law, the sacred teachings and texts of the church - that had come from God’s law written in the bible. Natural law, the human ability to know what is naturally right from our own reason. And finally, Human law, the......

Words: 1593 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

Explain How the Various Formulations of the Categorical Imperatives Might Be Applied to an Ethical Issue? [25]

...Explain how the various formulations of the Categorical Imperatives might be applied to an ethical issue? [25] Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is best known for his ‘Copernican Revolution’ in the theory of knowledge. He argued that space, time and causality were features of the way our minds organise experience, rather than features of the external world. Kant’s ethical theory was deontological and absolute. We use reason for morality acceptance. His categorical imperatives are part of Kant’s ethical theory, they require the sense of reason (which he believed that a human possess). He believed that if you combined ones duty with goodwill it will result in a moral act. Mixed emotions will not do in a moral situation, you need to exclude all possible emotions to make a perfect moral action. This will then result to summum bonum (an afterlife with God). However, to work out what your duty is, is an ethical dilemma. We can link Kant’s Categorical Imperatives (CI) to euthanasia. Euthanasia is terminating a patients life, painlessly, who is suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma. Terminating someone's life can be voluntary (someone helps a person die) or involuntary ( where a patient is capable of ending their own life). Euthanasia can also be passive (food and water deprivation) or active (injected a patient with a medicine which will painlessly kill them). There are many churches and religions which will deny this mercy killing. Natural law......

Words: 923 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Natural Law Religious Studies

...Part (b) ‘Natural Law as an absolutist/deontological theory cannot work in today’s society’ Natural Law was first propounded by Aristotle 4th century BC, it was a secular theory at the time of Aristotle. It was later revived in the 13th century AD by St. Thomas Aquinas, catholic theologian. In today’s society certain aspects of Natural law would be recognised as outdated and a theory that needs to be analysed. Many would agree with the statement ‘Natural law as a theory cannot work in today’s society’. Atheists would dispute the claim that God-given reason and nature provide us with the source of law. As Mel Thompson states in his book Ethical Theory, if one comes to the conclusion based on observation such as innocent suffering the world ‘is unlikely to be the product of an omnipotent or loving creator then the natural law argument loses its foundation. James Rachels also states that ‘the theory of Natural Law has gone out of fashion’. The world described by Newton, Darwin and Galileo has no place for “facts” about right or wrong. Their explanations of natural phenomena make no reference to values or purpose. ‘Perhaps no absolutist laws exist and there are no ‘right or ‘wrong’ actions as defined by a deontological approach. The problem with an absolutist and deontological approach is that it fails to consider several other factors in any moral action such as the individual, the culture, the individual’s situation or the consequences. A follower of......

Words: 839 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

The Return of Natural-Law Economics

...Historically, economic theory originated in the happy union of Athens and Jerusalem known as “the natural law,” and has always returned to the sanity of its roots—after exhausting the alternatives. As I read its history, economic theory has nearly completed its last great detour away from sanity, and is rapidly running out of alternatives to a renewal of “natural-law economics.” If such a renewal occurs, it won’t be because economists have decided to sit down and learn from philosophers (or, God forbid, theologians)—nothing could be farther from their minds—but for the same reason as the last seismic shift in economics, which began in the 1870s: a growing number of economists are finding the current state of economic theory a professional embarrassment. Of course, I may be underestimating the average economist’s threshold of embarrassment. But let me explain the nature of that * John D. Mueller is Associate Scholar of the Ethics and Public Policy Center and president of LBMC LLC, a financial-markets forecasting firm. For most of the 1980s he was Economic Counsel to the House Republican Conference (caucus) under chairman Jack Kemp. The research on which this article is based was made possible by The Lehrman Institute and the James Madison Program at Princeton University. 2 embarrassment, why only a renewed “natural law economics” will relieve it, and why non-economists should care. A Brief History of Economics. The most emblematic moment for economic......

Words: 10147 - Pages: 41