An inherent relationship seems to exist between law and virtue. Law is normally perceived as the extrinsic restraint that governs people’s actions, particularly to regulate the morally deficient people. On the other hand virtue is understood as by which an individual acts morally on one’s own. Medieval Philosopher and theologian Thomas Aquinas, simply describes natural law as “a good to be done and pursued, and evil avoided” he further explains that, whatever promotes life and wards off its barriers is a natural law. Aquinas taught that virtue is a good habit generated by one’s good works (Gonzalez, 197).
The relationship between natural law and virtue becomes evident when Aquinas claims that the sole purpose of law is to mould good men. He teaches that, if the intention of a law maker is pegged on the good of its subjects, then its effect is to absolutely make virtuous and morally upright men. Thus, if a virtue is as a result of the effect of law, obedience to the law is essential due to some principles other than virtue itself. Thomas Aquinas lays great emphasis on the fact that natural law should be a dictate of sound reason and rationality, because law and reason are the chief measures of human behavior or virtue.
Previously, readers viewed Aquinas as simply ‘Aristotle baptized’ since they seemed to talk about the same things in almost the same way. But, a closer look at their works shows that they both argued differently. For instance unlike Aristotle’s view that moral virtues are acquired solely through habituation, Aquinas argues that there also exists divinely granted moral virtues which may differ with their acquired counterparts. This difference in thought by Aquinas clearly portrays his understanding and improvement of Aristotle’s argument on moral virtue
Works Cited
González, Ana M. Contemporary Perspectives on Natural Law: Natural Law As a Limiting
Concept. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate, 2008. Print
