Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
NATURAL LAW by Aquinus, 4 tiers of law allow God to be discoverable…
NATURAL LAW by Aquinus
THE 4 TIERS OF LAW
AQUINUS' BELIEFS God loves us and made us imago dei and wants us to be moral but coz we're humans we can't understand him but he reveals how to be moral thru 4 tiers of law
ETERNAL LAW law we know innately like it's wrong to murder, law that has always existed tht God created but isn't always obeyed or obvious to ppl
DIVINE LAW given by god thru scripture, reveals immutable principles from eternal law like thou shall not kill, divine law is understood by reading scripture and using our ratio
Bible + reason = morality and understanding eternal law - how to reach God like perfection
NATURAL LAW altho divine law is given, u need to follow the moral law of god thats within human nature
our ratio (innate reasoning) is used alongside scripture to understand eternal law
-
HUMAN LAW laws of nations, ones humans make
should ideally be in line w eternal law but, if the laws r unjust, it's reasonable to disobey human law to avoid immorality
-
THE SYNDERESIS RULE - known as the key precept - you should do good and avoid evil, our ratio allows us to determine what is good and what is evil
-
TELOS
The TELOS is our purpose which is to reach a God-like perfection eschatologically (in the afterlife)
Not realising ur true telos and belieiving in being virtuous to reach eudaimonia (human flourishing) will lead you only to felicitas , earthly pleasures
Humans need to look at the bigger picture and not focus on worldly happiness, should believe in God and follow natural law
4 tiers of law allow God to be discoverable through reason and not his command gives humans free will, not blind obediance, can use their ratio to understand and make decisions, this allows for flexibility and can attract non-religiious ppl
KARL BARTH and AUGUSTINE it's dangerous to rely so much on human reasoning because humans are flawed after the fall, humans aren't oriented towards goodness - they commit sins and engage in their selfish desires, they have akrasia (weakness of will)
There is reliance on ratio but this just means its a bit harder to understand God and reach perfection, our purpose hasn't changed we still need to reach it somehow
Refutes natural law
Hobbes who fought in a civil war stated that "in a state of nature" humans will "scramble for everything they covet (want) "
- humans are selfish and would not be moral naturally, it's only bcoz of human law that they maintain a functioning society, they require the threat of punishment in order to act moral
Humans were created in the image of god and possess the ability to do good and have an innate desire to do good, seen by moral actions like giving to charity or knowing eternal law and how life is sacred.
God loves humans so gives them the ability to understand him
These provide clear instructions on how we can reach our telos without being confusing or unclear because the secondary precepts provide guidance on how apply the primary precepts and can enable us to obey the 4 tiers of law
FLETCHER disagrees with these rules because you should follow the principle of agape and always choose the most loving thing instead of obeying strict rules provided by the Bible, sometimes the most loving thing to do is end someone's life coz they're suffering
Agape love is too subjective and it's better to have a clear structure on what to do and what not to do
If the primary and secondary precepts are useful and successful in decision making then y do people still engage in evil, there r still negative occurances in the world like adultery
Humans were mislead by apparent goods which focus on worldly pleasure so they aren't able to clearly make moral decisions, these r tempting and lead us away from our purpose
Allows flexibility in this deontological approach to decision making, altho it is generally wrong to kill, if the intention of an individual is to bring abt peace or safety of another person then there is more of a good outcome than evil so it is in line w the synderesis principle
This contradicts the primary precepts which say u must preserve life so it's unclear and the doctrine refutees the very basis' of natural law
Even tho it goes against the precepts, humans must use their reasoning (ratio) to determine what they should do, if their intetnion is to bring good into the world they should make the appropriate decision of first looking for alternative ways to bring abt a good outcome and if there is only one way to create the good outcome then iit is justified to go against the primary precepts since the supreme precept is the synderesis rule
Strong argument coz the telos helps humans to practise discipline and focus on adopting moral human characteristics
gives life a purpose and value coz ppl will be focussed on reaching god like perfection
Positive aim of reaching perfection and therefore happiness, appealing and can give hope to ppl who don't have direction in their life, refrains them from being obsessive abt earthly pleasure
SARTRE rejects the idea of a telos, our existence isn't determined by God and we should make our own decisions and determine our own purpose humans have free will and should choose their own path of life rather than be restricted by some innate telos
Natural law is predominantly about doing good and avoiding evil and is based on human reasoning, not completely abt our telos
It's an accessible method for moral decision making whether or not you believe in God
Science isn't supporting of the idea of a telos because of the theory of evolution by Darwin presenting how this world is due to chance and our existence isn't for any kind of purpose.
It's obvious that humans have a telos because other objects in the world have a purpose which leads to a good outcome as proposed by Aristotle, a mug has the purpose of helping ppl to drink, bees have the purpose of pollinating
Natural law simply presents 'values' tht apparently help us to reach godlike perfection+morality but it's clear thru real life that morals change over time e.g. preventing homosexuality = good to homophobia = wrong
The primary precepts are unchanging values that all humans should live by and can be understood thru secondary precepts, helping to understand how u should lead ur life
There is the basic understanding of the synderesis rule which tells us to follow good and avoid evil
AUGUSTINE disagrees w the positive rule of synderesis because he believes tht humasn r born w original sin which leads them into temptation so they will not be able to aim for a moral way of living coz they will give into their akrasia