Discussion Points - Natural Law & Doing Good
Religious Studies: OCR A Level, topic 2.1.4
Debates About Natural Law and Striving for Good
Here are arguments for and against the ideas that natural law is helpful for making moral decisions and that human beings strive for good.
Reasons natural law is helpful
- It provides a framework for making moral decisions rather than leaving morality open to subjectiveness.
- It is universal and accessible to all.
- It makes sense: we as humans want to protect those who are vulnerable and know education is essential for the good of society.
- It supports human rights - natural law aims to protect and benefit all people equally.
Reasons natural law is unhelpful
- Aquinas precepts are based on a belief in God - this is unhelpful to atheists.
- It ignores the complex nature of human beings and assumes all strive for the same end.
- Some argue that it is out of date and ignores what is now socially acceptable (e.g. homosexual relationships and same-sex marriage).
Humans strive for good
- There must be some shared morality for society to operate.
- E.g. the protection of life, the education of children, the continuation of the human species.
Humans do not strive for good
- Hobbes argues that human nature is dangerous: that humans strive to get the things they want for themselves and do not consider others.
- E.g. humans can be selfish.
- We cannot all be striving for good because our collective actions are damaging nature itself.
- E.g. deforestation and pollution.
Test yourself on Discussion Points - Natural Law & Doing Good
In what ways is natural law a helpful principle?
Which of these is NOT a criticism of natural law?
Which group of people would NOT find Aquinas' precepts helpful?