St.

Thomas Aquinas insisted on how laws that are designed, proposed, passed and
enacted by humans are called human laws however, for him humans are not the only
beings that can design their own law describing it as “city of man”. Aquinas believed that
God is the supreme lawgiver as it is God’s plan for all laws to be involved in reality;
anything that exists anywhere is tied to the nature of God being the ultimate source.
Furthermore, he added the eternal law where he described it as God’s perfect plan as
he directs and controls his own creations. He describes this as “city of God” where
eternal law is its ultimate guide. Another was the divine law where it guides individuals
to “eternal happiness” as Aquinas believed that it was necessary for God to have
revealed more specific guidance about human beings. Finally, he emphasizes on the
Natural law where it is the rational creature’s participation in the eternal law; as human
beings we use our reasoning and behaviours to live our lives, that is what he meant for
a law to be natural.

In order to make the abstract ideas of natural law more specific and have grounded
ethical duties or obligations Aquinas suggests that we observe human and human
natural inclinations because we humans are naturally inclined toward basic and
fundamental goods. Additionally, Aquinas stated that human natural inclinations let us
figure out what is the natural law and what we need to do to follow natural law.

The first fundamental human good is Life since we can observe that we, humans, have
a natural inclination to preserve our life. This observation reveals that in the most basic
and most complex ways we persevere to protect or preserve our life. Our bodily actions
are the most simple and basic way of protecting our life because it is instinctual, like
how we put our hands out in front of our face to protect it from fall when we are falling
flat on the ground. On the other hand, an example of the most complex way of how we
preserve our life can be seen when humans work to get and have a job to make money
for the necessities that we need to live, to preserve our life.

As for the second fundamental human good Aquinas stated that it was procreation. He
observed that humans have natural inclination towards sexual reproduction or sexual
activities which is instinctual to us.
As for the third natural fundamental towards sociability or becomes sociable, it enacts
the work of Aristotle that humans are social animals. This idea is the point Aquinas is
making, that humans have a natural tendency toward sociability and that we develop
social relationships the moment we are born in this world, whether with our parents,
family, peers, and other people surrounding us. Inevitably, all humans are born in a
social world, and humans seem to instinctively want to be part of a group. We
instinctively want to be embraced by our peers, so we change ourselves and our
perspective on life to adapt to the group of peers we want to belong to.
The last fundamental human good is the natural inclination of humans towards
knowledge. Aquinas stated that humans have a very curious nature, wherein humans
tend to ask questions in order to know things, in order to the truth about certain things.
Aquinas viewed this as a natural yearning to know the truth about God.
The main principle of natural law is the principle of natural law because it states that we
need to perform actions that are aligned with the fundamental values/goods, life,
procreation, sociability, and knowledge, and we should not violate or destroy those
values/goods. An example of this is the suicide, the principle tells us that suicide is
immoral or forbidden because it violates or contradicts our natural inclination of self-
preservation which under the first fundamental values as such we should avoid actions
that would lead to suicide and we should only took actions that would promote our self-
preservation or life.
The principle of the golden rule is based on the idea that since humans are rational
beings. This states that humans have the capability to recognize that since we have
these natural laws, then other humans have it too. Therefore humans have the
understanding of the golden rule that states, “Do unto others as you would have them
do unto you.” This shows a moral principle of love thy neighbor. A moral dilemma with
this principle is that it would depend on a person’s ethical moral standards. It is a
difficult principle to apply due to different circumstances that people have, personal
values, and what a person deems is morally considerable.
Thomas Aquinas is a philosopher who struggles with philosophical ambiguity. Which
stated by Aquinas, when we are attempting to obey the natural law ethic, he admits that
there will be moments when deciding the right thing to do becomes challenging.
Aquinas, therefore, concludes that this is the authentic feature of living as a human
being in this cosmos, where living a human life may be in the disorderly path, which can
also be noticeable in Aristotle's works, the virtue ethics. We have several ethical
commitments as human beings, and we have an immense amount of ability that
demands our actions to manifest in virtues. However, there are moments that these
obligations that we tend to commit to can lead them into opposite directions. Whenever
it is difficult to decipher Natural Law, Aquinas then introduces a notable New Testament
principle into his natural law ethic, the Pauline principle, which means the process does
not support the end goal. In addition, there are times when we take pleasure in lying
because we believe the outcome would be better if we tell a lie than uttering the truth.
Aquinas recommends that we remember the Pauline principle in all situations for, it isn't
morally justified to do inadequately in the hopes of doing good. A simple example that is
happening today is that a community pantry opened up in a barangay, and a lady takes
all of the goods. Afterwhich some news or reports is broadcasting throughout the entire
nation about the actions that she has done. The only response she had, that it is not
only for me but also for the neighbor that surrounds me, is her reason is acceptable in
the natural law? Knowing that the community pantry is open for the whole barangay and
her neighbor as well, it seems irrelevant if you would analyze the situation and the true
meaning of the community pantry. Therefore it is simply wrong, in principle, to directly
tell a lie in front of all media to cover up the negative things you have done and protect
your name in exchange for hoping for a better outcome. The Pauline principle will serve
as a reminder that we should not do bad things or actions in the hopes of doing
something good out of it.
The last principle, the principle of double effect, was made by Aquinas as a solution to
complex cases or situations that includes two actions, good and bad actions, which
would result in the destruction of fundamental human values. For example, if person A
is physically attacked by person B and person A as a self-defense killed person B does
the action of person A acceptable in the natural law? This might seem immoral at first
but if we look closely at the main principle of natural law ethics, principle of Natural Law,
we would notice that we need to use our free will to perform these actions. Hence, we
need to look for what we are willing to do or what we are intending to do. In that
situation if we are intending to preserve our own life, then we are acting according to the
natural law ethics and anything that goes past that morally good action is not immoral
even if we cause the destruction of one's life. On the other hand, if we are intending to
destroy a life then we are not following the principle of natural law and that action is
immoral. In simpler terms the principle states that “It is morally permissible to perform
an action that has two effects, one good and the other bad, if certain conditions are
met.” The conditions that Aquinas set are as follows: the act itself must be good, the
doer must be intending a good outcome, the action must not violate the Pauline
principle, and the situation must be dire or serious because it involves destroying basic
human values.

Natural law ethics incorporates virtue ethics. Aquinas believed that virtues are
perfections; it is the natural outcome of following the directionality that is built into
human nature. According to Aquinas, God purposefully created and planned our own
existence. Our human lives will only reach its natural end when we are closer to God.
Aquinas believed that moral virtues are formed through repeated habits and actions
while theological virtues consist of faith, hope and charity; coming from God’s grace.
The distinction between what people do commission and what they don't do omission
seems to be fairly obvious. However, there are two forms in which the distinction is
quickly blurred. The first is about its moral significance: It might be more appropriate to
conclude that Bjorn allowed Hans to die rather than that he killed him, but does that
make him any less guilty? Bjorn's motives and ability to influence the outcome were the
same in either case. Making moral decisions can be made simpler with the help of laws.
However, it's difficult to come up with a substantive moral law that most of us wouldn't
admit has any exceptions. Don't kill, but what if you could save millions of people by
doing so? Don't lie - but what if it's about national security? Don't cheat - but what if
you're up against a ruthless cheat who would strip you naked if you let him? Can people
simply abandon laws, or is there a way to make them more flexible in order to cope with
the realities of life? Moreover, the moral rules may then be derived from these general
concepts. For example, don't lie, steal, or kill because it would reduce overall
satisfaction or because you wouldn't want it done to you. Then, in specific
circumstances, one follows these laws.