Natural Law
The concept of Natural law stands out in the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas. This principle is the ground of his ethics system. Aquinas builds his doctrine of natural law on his understanding of God and how He relates to creation. According to Aquinas, the law is the rule or measure of acts according to which one is set to or restrained from acting. It is dictated from the ruler to his community and is the expression of ruler’s care about the proper work of his community. Inevitably, the principles or reason which the ruler bestows upon his community, he himself has in mind. Aquinas suggests that the idea by which God governs the universe is the eternal law. However, the law is present not only in the intellect of the ruler but also in what is ruled. In this sense, all creation is bestowed with the eternal law in the form that it is written in their essence or nature. Humans possess free will and reason, and so the natural law applied to them means that they are intrinsically inclined towards attaining happiness and have general knowledge of how it can be achieved. Aquinas suggests that this universal principle is imprinted in the very nature of humans and that we can only by means of reason decide the good from bad. The good in its turn is what conforms to reason. Generally saying, as all of the creation has its end or fulfillment, the natural law states that since we are naturally inclined to good, all our choices, as well as understanding of our personal fulfillment as happiness, can all be achieved only by the means of reasoning and studying our nature.
Aquinas also concludes that our ability to reasoning has to have some basis. This basis is the “first principles” or moral precepts from which all our reasoning starts. These principles are not observable or learnable in the sense that they are not learned through observation but are inherent to human nature. The most general and foundational of these principles is “good is to be done and evil is to be avoided”. This principle follows Socrates in a sense that we only follow what we think is good. Aquinas notes that what we follow is an apparent good, as we follow what at least appears good to us in some sense. For example, we drink alcohol not because we know it is harmful to our health and might cause other issues but we choose to consume it for the feeling it brings (relaxation, drive, sociability, etc.) which appear to us as good. More specific examples of this principle related to human life are the principle of life preservation and reproduction. Natural law also commands us to transmit life to further generations and care for our offspring. This law makes us develop reasoning and activities which are distinct to humans such as knowledge, feelings, love, and compassion. Natural law also makes our interactions and behavior so that we function in harmony in society. It is also expressed as precepts considering murder and adultery inherently bad. Our lives are governed by this natural law which commands us to promote and develop our rational and moral capacities as well as growing virtues.
The way in which natural law governs our lives consists in that we cannot defy or resist it. It is the basic principle weaved into the fabric of humanity which is the starting point for all human nature. We cannot resist the instinct of self-preservation which is crucial to our survival and therefore, to fulfillment of our function as Gods creation. The desire to reproduce cannot be thrown away similarly as the desire to care for own offspring cannot be refuted because it is the basis of our life itself, it is inevitably present in all of us. The same is true about a more general form of this principle, we only do what we think is good for us, no one can desire what is bad for him because it does not go along with his nature as a human being. Similarly, we desire love, feelings and knowledge because the acquisition of them is in our nature.
The Nature of Moral Action
Aquinas proceeds with his explanations about the nature of moral acts by specifying how humans make their decisions. According to his account, the act is good if it conforms to the fulfillment of one's purpose according to one's nature. The reason is the key trait of our nature as human beings, so good actions are rational. Aquinas suggests that reason is composed of two features – intellect and will. Former is the cognitive power and latter is the appetitive one. Intellect enables us to understand the goodness that is present within things, to know and judge what to do while the will is the native desire for what is understood as good. In this view, the will is always consequent to the acts of intellect – intellect supplies will with the object to which the latter inclines and moves to as an end. However, neither all of our choices are always right, nor we always follow what is prescribed by the natural law. It is evident that people make mistakes and do not only good acts but bad ones too. On this account, Aquinas makes a distinction between conscience and synderesis. He suggests that synderesis is the part of the rational part of humans which is responsible for containing the first principles or precepts dictated by the natural law. This part apprehends them without inquiry and according to Aquinas is never mistaken. Conscience in its turn is the part of human agents which makes decisions and judgments about the goodness of actions. Conscience does this by applying general principles contained within synderesis to particular real-life situations. In contrary to synderesis, conscience can make mistakes and makes them by erroneously applying general rules to particular situations.
As discussed above, human agents follow only what they understand as good. But we still eventually commit bad acts. According to that, Aquinas explains that acts which we make are bad when we either act with erring conscience or against it. When the act is performed out of the error in applying general rules to particular situation, then the act is bad because we made a bad judgment. However, when we make actions against what our conscience says to us, such acts will inevitably be bad. The reason is in if we always aim for what we perceive as good, then acting against what is understood as good will be going against one's nature and that act will not fail in being bad. Aquinas also explains that ignorance causes involuntariness in acts. He distinguishes two types of ignorance – antecedent and consequent. The ignorance is consequent if the agent aims his will at the ignorance itself. So, if the agent voluntarily keeps himself from the knowledge he should or ought to know. Such acts are voluntary. Antecedent ignorance is exhibited when an act is committed innocently, without refuting or keeping self from the knowledge one should or ought to know. Such acts are involuntary.
When judging the goodness or badness of a fact, Aquinas presents a way to find which one is the case. The main components of an act are its object, intent, and circumstances. The object of the act is what is done, the intent is why or for what it is performed, and circumstances are the context of an act. For an act to be good, all of its three components should be good, i.e. be rational. For example, if a man prays to make others believe he is righteous, his act is bad despite the object being good because the intent is bad. Aquinas explains that the opposite case is also bad (bad act for good intent), meaning that, in his understanding, the end does not justify the means – all three components should be good.
