Question

Reading question about Aquinas, Natural Law.

T‌‌‌‍‌‍‌‌‍‌‌‍‍‌‍‌‍‌‍O REVIEW: The discussion turns around a version of natural law theory. As with any natural law theory, the key here is to understand what Aquinas means by 'nature' or 'natural' and how he arrives at those determinations. Aquinas takes it that "every act of reason and will in us is based on that which is according to nature" (87). The universality of reason guarantees the universality of the moral code that is 'natural' to us. It also guarantees the availability of knowledge of morality to any human person. This raises a problem. The word 'law' is notoriously polysemantic. Here it means an order that is inscribed in us by nature. But this law which is allegedly natural can be broken. It is not like the 'natural law' of gravitation or other natural laws of later science and philosophy, since these cannot be broken. The central player in this theory is, of course, God.Divine wisdom and benevolence ensures that the natural law of morality is connected to our capac‌‌‌‍‌‍‌‌‍‌‌‍‍‌‍‌‍‌‍ities as rational beings who can set goals, pursue higher ends, and have this 'natural inclination' to apprehend the good (see pg. 89). Aquinas takes after Aristotle and is perhaps even more of a technical thinker. He is the quintessential medieval Scholastic ("of the school") thinker. He attempted to give a firm footing to the Catholic interpretation of Scripture by appealing to the writings of Aristotle, "the philosopher" of reason. Ultimately, he argues that faith and reason each have their own domain, and that reason must defer to faith on matters of scriptural interpretation. This effort fails on numerous counts, but remains highly suggestive as the quintessential statement of High Medieval moral thought in Catholic Europe. Please indicate which question you have chosen in your reply. Submit that reply here for a grade on the assignment. The grades will be more varied than with earlier submissions. Your reply should be one paragraph in length‌‌‌‍‌‍‌‌‍‌‌‍‍‌‍‌‍‌‍.

Expert Solution

In the context "The Ethical Life," Aquinas is trying to figure out what is the best way for humans to live. He looks at different options and tries to find the most reasonable one. Shafer-Landau (2010) Aquinas comes to the conclusion that the best way for humans to live is in accordance with nature.

Aquinas defines nature as "the principle and cause of things which are according to their nature." So, according to Aquinas, nature is what makes things the way they are supposed to be. He believes that humans are part of nature and, as such, should live in accordance with it. He believes that living in accordance with nature is the best way for humans to live because it leads to the most happiness. He argues that humans are designed to function in a certain way and that when they live in accordance with their nature, they will be the happiest.

He also believes that living in accordance with nature is the most reasonable thing to do. He argues that it is unreasonable to try to live in a way that is contrary to nature. For example, it would be unreasonable for a human to try to live like a bird because it is not in our nature to do so.In conclusion, Aquinas believes that the best way for humans to live is in accordance with nature. His overall view of nature is that it is good. This is because he believes that God is good and that everything that God has created is good. Aquinas also believes that human beings are created in the image of God and that they have the ability to reason and make moral choices. Therefore, humans are able to choose between good and evil.

Reference

Shafer-Landau, R. (2010). The Ethical Life: Fundamental Readings in Ethics and Moral Problems.

Please enter your email address to h

  • 100% Plagiarism-free
  • 100% Human-written
Get Custom Solution
Blurred answer

Related Questions