“Natural Law does not provide an adequate basis for morality” Discuss how far this is true
By Lydia Davies
In this essay, the arguments made will help to consider whether or not if Natural Law does provide an adequate basis for morality or not. The arguments will look into Aquinas theory and if his beliefs provide a sense of morality for all humans.
Natural Law is a moral theory which maintains that law should be based on morality and ethics. Natural Law holds that the law is based on what’s correct. Natural Law is discovered by humans through the use of reason and choosing between good and evil. It finds power in discovering certain universal standards in morality and ethics. The strengths that are found in Natural Law are the strengths of an absolutist deontological view of morality. It allows people to follow common rules so they can then structure communities. Natural Law provides justification and support for certain core ideas which are popular in modern times, for example human rights and equality. Natural Law provides a clear moral basis for Christians to follow, example would be, the primary precepts to ‘defend life’ which provides a moral rule to help people to understand that all life is sacred and we should defend all life. We are also able to us our reason in order to distinguish between what is right and what is wrong, it allows us to use our reason to fulfil our purpose as humans.
A key argument that would be made is that not all people share the same life purposes; everyone wants to get something different out of life, fulfilling their own life purposes. Not all people “find love in the same way; some find love and purpose in life through the expression of their sexuality” (Robert Bowie). Aquinas did not consider that every human thinks and feels differently, to make his theory relatable to all humans. Human beings have their own minds; the whole person should be the decision maker and follow what makes them happy. Homosexual men and...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document