THE NATURAL LAW: ST.

THOMAS AQUINAS

St.Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), Italian philosopher and theologian of the medieval

period, known as the “Angelic Doctor”.
 Aquinas also believes that man's actions are directed towards an end.
 When man acts, guided by reason; he definitely has purpose.
 Happiness for Aquinas is not found in this material world which offers imperfect
happiness only
 If real happiness is unattainable in this world, there must be another world where
man can find it, that is, during our next life in heaven where real happiness is
achieved with God, the real source of perfect happiness.

a. The Natural Law and Its Tenets

 First, it is an ordinance of reason. Primarily, an authentic law must have rational

basis, on its nature as well as on its implementation.
 Second, it is promulgated by person in authority. Persons in authority refer to
group of people who have the power to propose promulgate, and approve a bill
to finally make it a law which every person in the land is bound to obey.
 Lastly, it is for the common good. An authentic law aims towards the general
welfare of the people in society and not just for the benefit of only few.

 Four Types of Law

1. Eternal Law -the rational plan of God
2. Human Law -positive laws which include civil and criminal law. Enlightened by
human reasons, these laws are promulgated based on the natural law.
3. Divine Law -is meant to complement other types of law. Its focus is on the
revelation which aims towards the realization of man’s eternal end.
4. Natural Law - is the type of law which is connected to the eternal law and
which is accessible to human nature. Part of this natural law is the
natural ability of man to distinguish what is good and what is evil. It
is the moral law that orders man to do good and to avoid evil.

 St. Tomas Aquinas coined the term synderesis to refer to the faculty of man
which gives him the natural inclinations to some specific goods
 If man's action bring him closer to the realization of his end as human, then he is
considered moral, otherwise he is called immoral

b. Happiness as Constitutive of Moral and Cardinal Virtue

1. Prudence is understood as one’s ability to discern what is good, right and proper in a
particular moral situation.
 Being prudent is easily displayed when the choices are between good and evil,
but it becomes complicated when choices are between two evils.
  Moral principle is appropriate in this case which says, “Choosing between two
evils, choose the lesser one.”

2. Temperance is understood as one’s ability to practice moderation at all times.

 Moderation is the golden mean, like in Aristotle’s idea, between both extremes
of excess and defect

3. Fortitude is understood as one's ability to overcome fear and danger

 To avoid danger for a greater cause is definitely better that facing it, and it is not
cowardice.

4. Justice is understood as one’s ability to give another person what is due to him
 Likewise synonymously used as fairness.
 Giving what is due requires reason and impartiality
 A Latin dictum says, “Nemo dat quod non habet” (“Nobody gives what he does
not have”).
 It is only given when one understands what another person deserves and what
he himself deserves as well.

DEONTOLOGICAL ETHICS: IMMANUEL KANT

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), a German philosopher of the modern era is known
primarily because of his Critique of Practical Reason, which becomes the foundation
of his moral philosophy

Kant’s fundamental teaching states that reason is the source of any moral or ethical
judgment.
 Reason and reason alone can assist man in distinguishing good as moral and
evil as immoral.
 He categorically rejects the role of feelings in our act of discernment between
good and evil.
 Kantian Ethics states that man’s pursuit for good is an act that has end in itself.

When we act, we act freely, that means nobody forces us to perform an act that is
against our will.
 Kant’s promotes that the only good will is intrinsically good is freely chosen.
 Doing good is not a human inclination based on feeling which drives us to
choose our action. Rather, it is based on the concept of human duty or human
obligation.

Acting morally based on duty must be understood whether an act that is done “from
the motive of duty” or an act done “in accordance with duty.”
c. Good Will
 Good will is not just the source of intrinsic good, it is actually intrinsically good.
 All concepts of goods as well as the concept of happiness must be related
to good will.
 Affirming this is denying other ethicists point of view that happiness is the
summum bonum or the highest good, nor happiness is the possession of
material things, nor happiness is based on practical uses of an object,
etc..
 For Kant, happiness is meaningless if not combined with good will.
 Positive values or attributes like intellectual activities, talents, virtues and
the like, are corruptible and can be considered as sources of evil without
good will.

d. Categorical Imperative
 To understand Kant’s categorical imperative, it is good to look into its difference
from hypothetical imperative.
 Manebog et al. write about hypothetical and categorical imperatives as, “if
you want to attain a certain end, act in such-and-such a way” and “No
matter what end you desire to attain, act in such-and-such a way.”
 The difference between these two is obvious. Hypothetical is introduced
“ifs” and “qualifications” while categorical has no exceptions, no “ifs” and
no qualifications.

 Kantian Ethics emphasizes the existence of rules which determine man’s moral
status, thus, a person who follows these ordained rules are considered moral.

 Universalizability is a famous formulation of Kant’s categorical imperative

 It means that a person is ought always to behave as if his course of
conduct were to become a universal code of behavior or considered as a
universal law

 Another formulation of Kant’s categorical imperative is “end-in-itself”.

 It states that when we act, we have to consider our own person and that of
other as an end and not as means

Different Kind of Rights

Agapay (1991), citing Glenn, defines right as, objectively taken, anything which is owed
or due.

Taken subjectively, that is, as residing in a person, right is a moral power, bound to be
respected by others, of doing, possessing or acquiring something.

a. Legal Right
  Merriam-Webster defines legal right as a claim recognized and delimited by law
for the purpose of securing it; the interest in a claim which is recognized by and
protected by sanctions of law imposed by a state, which enables one to possess
property or to engage in some transaction or course of conduct or to compel
some other person to so engage or to refrain from some course of conduct under
certain circumstances, and for the infringement of which claim the state provides
a remedy in its courts of justice; the aggregate of capacities, powers, liberties,
and privileges by which a claim is secured; a capacity of asserting a legally
recognized claim; a right cognizable in a common-law court as distinguished from
a court having jurisdiction in equity.

 Legal right is understood as our shield against anyone who will try to violate our
freedom as stipulated in the constitution and in the existing legal codes of the
land.

 Legal rights are inclusive in the sets of human rights enacted as human positive
laws, either by the state or by the church (religious sect)

 Those enacted by the state define our civil rights, while those
enacted by the church define our ecclesiastical or religious rights.

b. Moral Right
 Merriam-Webster defines moral right as the right of the creator of a creative work
to protect the integrity of the work. Cambridge English Dictionaries likewise
defines moral right as a writers or artist’s legal rights to protect their works, for
example, to prevent it from being changed.
 These definitions focus on the integrity of a particular human work which
must be protected by law.
 Common in these definitions is the fact that someone has a right or
justified claim, entitlement or assertion of what he holds his due.
 If a writer or an artist claims that his works must be protected, then he
must have a moral basis or justification for the claim.

 In claiming that you have rights, you must also have to claim that alongside with
these rights are duties that you ought to perform.
 This means that there is a sense of reciprocity between rights and duties
 If you say that “it is my right", then, others are duty-bound or required to
respect your claim, as you are also duty-bound to respect theirs.

 Moral rights oblige us to seek ways to improve the outcomes of our actions.
 Even without written laws, there is, within us, a capacity to discern the
good to be done and the evil to be avoided.