Introduction to Aquinas

Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) was an intellectual and religious revolutionary, living at a time of great
philosophical, theological and scientific development. He was a member of the Dominican Friars, which
at that time was considered to be a cult, and was taught by one of the greatest intellects of the age,
Albert the Great (1208–1280). In a nutshell Aquinas wanted to move away from Plato’s thinking, which
was hugely influential at the time, and instead introduce Aristotelian ideas to science, nature and
theology.

Motivating Natural Law Theory: The Euthyphro Dilemma and Divine Command Theory

The likely answer from a religious person as to why we should not steal, or commit adultery is: “because
God forbids us”; or if we ask why we should love our neighbor or give money to charity then the answer
is likely to be “because God commands it”. Drawing this link between what is right and wrong and what
God commands and forbids is what is called the Divine Command Theory (DCT).

There is a powerful and influential challenge to such an account called the Euthyphro dilemma after the
challenge was first raised in Plato’s Euthyphro. The dilemma runs as follows: Either God commands
something is right because it is, or it is right because God commands it. If God commands something
because it is right, then God’s commands do not make it right, His commands only tell us what is right.
This means God simply drops out of the picture in terms of explaining why something is right.

If on the other hand something is right because God commands it then anything at all could be right;
killing children or setting fire to churches could be morally acceptable. But if a moral theory says this
then that looks as if the theory is wrong.

Most theists reject the first option and opt for this second option that God’s commands make something
right. But they then have to face the problem that it make morality haphazard. This “arbitrariness
problem” as it is sometimes called, is the reason that many, including Aquinas, give up on the Divine
Command Theory.

So for Aquinas what role, if any at all, does God have when it comes to morality? For him, God’s
commands are there to help us to come to see what, as a matter of fact, is right and wrong rather than
determine what is right and wrong. That is, Aquinas opts for the first option in the Euthyphro dilemma
as stated above. But then this raises the obvious question: if it is not God’s commands that make
something right and wrong, then what does? Does not God just fall out of the picture? This is where his
Natural Law Theory comes in.

Natural Law Theory

Summary of Aquinas’s Natural Law Theory

For Aquinas everything has a function (a telos) and the good thing (s) to do are those acts that fulfil that
function. Some things such as acorns, and eyes, just do that naturally. However, humans are free and
hence need guidance to find the right path. That right path is found through reasoning and generates
the “internal” Natural Law. By following the Natural Law we participate in God’s purpose for us in the
Eternal Law.
However, the primary precepts that derive from the Natural Law are quite general, such as, pursue good
and shun evil. So we need to create secondary precepts which can actually guide our day-to-day
behavior. But we are fallible so sometimes we get these secondary precepts wrong, sometimes we get
them right. When they are wrong they only reflect our apparent goods. When they are right they reflect
our real goods.

Finally, however good we are because we are finite and sinful, we can only get so far with rational
reflection. We need some revealed guidance and this comes in the form of Divine Law. So to return to
the Euthyphro dilemma. God’s commands through the Divine Law are ways of illuminating what is in
fact morally acceptable and not what determines what is morally acceptable. Aquinas rejects the Divine
Command Theory.

Natural Law to preserve and protect human life. Clearly suicide is not preserving and protecting human
life. It is therefore irrational to kill oneself and cannot be part of God’s plan for our life; hence it is
morally unacceptable.

Imagine that someone is considering having an abortion after becoming pregnant due to rape. The same
reasoning is going to apply. We ought to preserve and protect human life and hence an abortion in this
case is morally wrong.

However, as we will see, Aquinas thinks that there are some instances where it is morally acceptable to
kill an innocent person and therefore there may be occasions when it is morally acceptable to kill a
fœtus. But how can this be correct? Will this not violate the primary precept about preserving life? The
answer is to understand that for Aquinas, an action is not just about what we do externally but is also
about what we do internally (i.e. our motivations). With this distinction he can show that, for example,
killing an innocent can be morally acceptable.

We might think that given the Natural Law to “preserve and protect life” he would say that this action is
morally wrong. But, in fact, he would say the son’s action was not morally wrong (Aquinas discusses self-
defense in the Summa Theologica.

Key words

1. Idea of the good- Good is generally considered to be the opposite of evil, and is of interest in the
study of morality, ethics, religion and philosophy.

2. Material cause- an example is a material cause of a being which is physical properties or makeup

3. Final cause- is that for the sake of which a thing is changing

4. Potency- the power and influence that a person, action, or idea has to affect or change people's lives,
feelings, or beliefs

5. Human law- are considered conclusions from the natural law when they pertain to those matters
about which the natural law offers a clear precept

6. Natural law- Natural law is a theory in ethics and philosophy that says that human beings possess
intrinsic values that govern our reasoning and behavior

7. Formal cause- is the structure or direction of a being.

9. Act- behave in the way specified(behavior)

10. Eternal law- is comprised of those laws that govern the nature of an eternal universe.

11. Divine law- Divine laws are those that God has, in His grace, seen fit to give us and are those
“mysteries”, those rules given by God which we find in scripture

Study Questions

Natural, is often used to describe a beings actions or behaviors per societal standards, and if they
conform to the common understanding of what should be and how they should be done, allows for the
determination of whether these things are normal or abnormal and whether or not the are lawful or
evil. This also means that there is a pressure to conform to societies understandings of normalcy to
directly reap the greatest rewards. A person perceived to be of greater normalcy is meant to be more
liked in social settings, they are meant to avoid crimes, and avoid taboos. Social mores, peer pressure
criminal correction centers, all exist to reinforce and to enforce, “normalcy.” This also means, given that
it is perception given the culture and society, that these things are subject to change based on the needs
and desires of the society. Those things are the back bone of the collective culture being able to work
toward what it believes to be the best, most desirable, and ultimately the most normal, natural things.

In comparison with Aquinas’ understanding, consider that Aquinas is not limiting the scope, application
and source of natural law to perception. Meaning that the ontological understanding of the natural is
apportioned to the societies and cultures at the time who consider and enforce what they view as
normal and what is not. What Aquinas addresses are the epistemological understandings of the natural
as it relates to law. Fundamental, unchanging and ever-present within all of nature itself, such that it
came from the God that created nature and all other things. Aquinas likely recognized the fact that
people understand the eternal law in different ways, but to Aquinas, natural law would be the attempt
to ascertain and apply the eternal law, such that it fit in accordance with God’s eternal law.

To further separate the two, the natural behaviors as the are perceived by a society are not derived
from a source outside of the culture, rather entirely within. If it is outside, it was to be absorbed and
added to the culture. That is because these values of what is natural behavior do not exist without that
culture, and once that culture disappears, so too does their understanding of natural behavior.

2. There have been several attempts to argue that behavior is “natural,” when the human thing to do is
to manipulate nature for our benefit.

And so we do. We don’t catch fish with our paws, as bears. We weave nets. We make hooks and lines
and attach them to poles.

We build houses to keep nature out and build a safer and more comfortable place inside. We grow crops
then preserve them, cook them, and manipulate the shelf life so they are fresher and usable longer.

Our lives are NOT extensions of “natural law.” Indeed, we have created an exception for ourselves.

Human laws are a rather contradictory and convoluted set of ideas about society and how we should
live. Many of them are for convenience. You follow traffic laws to enhance the flow of traffic and avoid
accidents. There isn't any “natural law” to this, because movement in nature is rather haphazard and
random. But we have purpose.

The natural world doesn’t have “laws” against theft or killing. One gets away with what one can, and
pays the penalty if one gets caught. There is no morality attached. But in our social structures, we set up
a structure for there to be official sanction against criminal behavior, not a survival of the fittest.

We even have concepts of justice and injustice that allow us to contemplate changes in society to make
life better for more people.