To what extent do the
strengths of Natural Law
outweigh its weaknesses?
(40)
Natural Law is a concept that God has given humans the free will to choose
between good and evil. This idea was created by Saint Thomas Aquinas, to
educate everyone that we have the divine right to carve our own pathways, and
it is our fate that we forge. Natural Law also corresponds with the idea of double
effect. If we do a good action, a good and bad result will appear due to our
deeds. Could Natural Law and the idea of double effect coincide with a humans
faulty reasoning?
In all contemplation, Natural Law is a strong moral basis that humans can use to
create a better future for themselves; for living a life in accordance with the word
of God will allow you to enter the ultimate paradise – heaven. This will allow
humans to fulfil their telos (purpose) by obeying the divine and live all of eternity
with utmost serenity.
Natural Law is one of the four tiers of law: The Eternal Law (God Himself), The
Divine Law (the word of God revealed through the Bible, specifically through the
Ten Commandments), The Natural Law (the free will humans have to perform
good), and The Human Law (the edicts given forth by the governments). So
Natural Law provides a framework for making moral decisions rather than
leaving morality open to subjectiveness. There are the Five Primary Precepts in
which Aquinas erected which commands humans to make moral decisions based
on its principles, these are: worship God, live in an ordered society, educate your
children, preserve live and reproduce. This is logical to reason with; we as
humans want to protect those who are vulnerable and know education is
essential for the good of society. Anyone can follow these precepts, for it is
universal and accessible to all – there is no reason to not follow these laws. It
advocates for human rights – natural law aims to protect all and benefit all
people equally. Aquinas additionally considers that humans strive for good. There
must be some shared morality for society to operate. We humans are constantly
shifting in attitudes, we have advanced justice and fair treatment for all – which
is why we create new secondary precepts to combat illicit sins currently
occurring in humanity.
Nevertheless, Natural Law is fallible to counterarguments. One notable instance
is that Hobbes argues that human nature is dangerous: that humans strive to get
the things they want for themselves and do not consider other – due to these
humans do not strive for good. We cannot all be striving for good because our
collective actions are damaging nature itself, such as deforestation and pollution.
So, Aquinas’ argument that humans are ‘subject to erroneous reasoning’ holds
no water – humanity understands their actions have consequences, so this
To what extent do the
strengths of Natural Law
outweigh its weaknesses?
(40)
rebellion against the divine shall only result to the most tragic calamity. Likewise,
Aquinas’ precepts are based on a belief in God – this is unhelpful to atheists. It
ignores the complex nature of human beings and assumes all strive for the same
end. Some argue that it is out of date and ignores what is now socially
acceptable, such as homosexual relationships and same-sex marriage. Leviticus
strictly condemns such ‘transgressions’ – “do not have relations with another
man as with a woman, for that is detestable”, furthermore the Primary Precepts
encourage reproduction and bearing offspring - same-sex relationships do not
offer this in the eyes of Aquinas.
After much evidence, in all essence, Natural Law is one of the most successful
means of judging a human’s behaviour, it encourages one to contribute to
society, you should act in synderesis – “do good and avoid evil”. We all
comprehend that those who do not follow these regulations are subject to eternal
damnation and torment – they have gone against God; Natural Law is wholly in
sync with The Divine Law, so we must trail it, or else misery and agony shall
follow and endure.
