Today’s Assignment:
Natural Law
• EMP (15 pages)
– The Tradition of Natural
Law (Lucas), pp. 195-198;
from “Summa Theologica
(St. Thomas Aquinas), pp.
199-202; from The Ethics
of Natural Law (Harris),
pp. 203-209.
Objectives from reading:
Natural Law
Know difference between descriptive
(scientific ), prescriptive (natural and
divine), & human (civil, positive,
statue) laws
Comprehend Aquinas’ features of a
law, how natural law can be explained
in terms of moral standards and the 4
natural inclinations of human beings.
Comprehend the concept of “the
common good” vs. concept of
“greatest good for the greatest
number.”
Know & apply the Principle of
Forfeiture and the Principle of Double
Effect
The Peacemaker
Natural Rights & Natural Law
• In the “Declaration of Independence,”
Thomas Jefferson (following the
English philosopher, John Locke)
makes reference to “self-evident”
truths, among which are certain
“inalienable rights”
• Martin Luther King makes reference
explicitly to “natural law” (as well as
the U. S. Constitution) to argue that
racist laws are inherently unjust
What is this “natural law”?
Natural Law
Two important things about natural law
theory:
(1) Natural laws are prescriptive; they tell us
how we ought to behave.
In this sense, they are unlike physical
laws aka laws of nature (e.g.,
gravitation), which tell us how things do in
fact behave and are, therefore,
descriptive.
“Unlike rocks, we are always at liberty
to disobey the natural laws that pertain
to us. This is how we sin.”
Natural Law
(2) Natural laws are absolute, because
the goods in which they are grounded
are incommensurable
- that is, there is no common metric that
would allow us to compare them.
Hence, there can be no ‘trade-offs’
between, say, protecting life and
seeking knowledge; or, more
importantly, between protecting this
life rather than that life.
Natural Law
• Encompasses tradition of moral and legal
philosophy reaching back to Aristotle & Roman
Stoics (Cicero)
• There is a secular and a theological version
– (the latter connect nicely to the notion of “divine
command” theory; cf. St Paul)
• Neither focuses upon “civil” law (what we normally
mean by “law”);
– instead, these traditions use “Law” in the same sense
as Kant – the “moral law”
Sources of
Natural Law Tradition
• Suppose we took the world’s current
major legal systems and threw out any
provisions that were unique to one or
only some.
– Would there be anything left?
• Political Problem of the Roman
Empire:
– “How do we govern a multinational,
multicultural, pluralistic commonwealth
encompassing many nationalities,
religions, ethnicities, and legal systems?
– What laws shall we uniformly enforce upon
ALL subjects (regardless of race, color, or
religious creed)?”
Transition from Secular to Sacred
Solution: Common legal core, the Roman code
But of this code, Cicero writes:
“True law is right reason in agreement with nature;
it is of universal application, unchanging and everlasting; it
summons to duty by its commands, and averts from wrongdoing
by its prohibitions. . .
…We cannot be freed from its obligations by Senate or People, and we
need not look outside ourselves for an expounder or interpreter of it . . .
Cicero(106 BC-43 BC)
…There will not be different laws at Rome and at Athens, or different
laws now and in the future, but one eternal and unchangeable law
will be valid for all nations and all times, and there will be one
master and ruler, that is God, over us all, for he is the author of
this law, its promulgator, and its enforcing judge.”
Natural Law:
St Thomas Aquinas
• God’s law is “imprinted upon us . . . The light of natural
reason, whereby we discern what is good and what is
evil, is nothing else than an imprint on us of the divine
light”
1225-1274
• There are at least some moral truths, derived from God
and grounded in God, that everyone, regardless of their
religious beliefs or cultural background, must be
responsible for knowing
• Distinguish this (as Romans did) from “civil” or “positive”
law, and also from “divine” or “revealed” law (the Church
has custody of this)
In his Summa Theologica, Aquinas acknowledges universal moral truths
Examples of Natural Law
– “Golden” Rule
– Principle of reciprocity
– Prohibition of
unjustifiable homicide
– Respect for Life
Danger: mistaking one’s own
cultural or religious habits (or even
prejudices) for universal natural law
Everyone, everywhere
seems to have some
versions of these
e.g., Which of the 10 Commandments
would you challenge as not being a
“Natural Law”?
Impact/Influence of
Natural Law Tradition
• International Law (Grotius,
Pufendorf)
• Constitution & U. S. Declaration of
Independence (Jefferson)
• JUST WAR THEORY (jus ad
bellum AND jus in bello – law of
war)
• Kant and the Categorical Imperative
• Gandhi, King, and notion of
principled civil disobedience
Natural Inclinations
• Self-preservation
– Natural inclination to live
• Procreation
– Natural inclination to reproduce
• Knowledge
– Natural inclination to learn
• Sociability
– Natural inclination to love and seek affection
Two Important Principles of
Natural Law (“Casuistry” in Harris’s essay)
1. The Principle of Forfeiture
and
2. The Principle of Double Effect
Principle of Forfeiture:
If I threaten your life…
(i.e., violate the principle
concerning the protection of
life),
…I forfeit my right to life.
Thus, killing in self-defense is
morally permissible.
“If you take another life, you forfeit your own right to life”
Principle of Double Effect
• A wrong or evil result brought about as a consequence
of some morally right action (undertaken with intention to
do good) is not itself blameworthy
– Most common in medicine & military
• Sometimes it is permissible to perform an action that
has,
besides its desired (good) effects,
a second effect that it would be impermissible to bring
about, either as an end or as a means.
Secondary evil must be a consequence…not a catalyst!
Principle of Double Effect
• Is the act good / morally permissible?
• Is the bad effect unavoidable?
• Is bad effect means to achieve good
effect?
• Does good effect outweigh bad effect?
Sometimes the answer to the middle two questions is not readily apparent…
Key points are: “intentions” and “avoidability”
Doctrine of Double Effect
Act
No
Yes
Is the Bad
Effect
Avoidable?
Yes,
It is
avoidable
No
Is the Bad
Effect the
Means of
Producing a
Good Effect?
Not
Intended Is the Bad Effect
(Side
Effect
Only)
Yes, Bad
Effect is
Intended
Not Permissible…
…Forbidden
Disproportionate?
Yes
No
Act is Permissible
Is it
Permissible?
Case 1
A pregnant women is diagnosed with uterine
cancer. If her uterus is removed, she will be
saved, but the fetus will die. So the
hysterectomy will have evil effects.
May a surgeon perform the operation?
Similar case : Conjoined twins
Case 2
Terror Bombing vs Strategic Bombing
Sometime in 1940, British policy
regarding bombing changed to mandate
the targeting of built-up areas as
opposed to military and industrial
targets.
It’s estimated that 300,000 German
civilians were killed and 780,000 injured
as a direct result of this terror bombing.
In Dresden alone, 100,000 civilians were
killed.
Case 2 (con’t)
1.
In the context of war, bombing
the enemy is a morally
legitimate action.
2.
The direct effect of the
bombing was the deaths of
civilians and the promotion of
terror. This is not morally
acceptable.
3.
The intent of the British policy
was to incur terror. Killing
civilians was indeed an
essential part of the plan.
Questions on Natural Law?
Reading for Next Class
Applying the Doctrine of Double Effect
• EMP (7 pages)
– Natural Law and the
Principle of Double Effect:
Six Hypothetical Cases
(Lucas), pp. 211-217.
• CSME (6 pages)
– Incident at Shkin (Schoultz),
pp. 7-11; Terror and
Retaliation-Who is Right?”
(Rubel), p. 57.
Objectives from
reading:
Natural Law
Comprehend the concept of
“the common good” vs
concept of “greatest good
for the greatest number.”
Know & apply the Principle
of Forfeiture and the
Principle of Double Effect
Mid-term Review
• Responsible for course material through Unit 13
(Applying the Doctrine of Double Effect)
• 2 sections
– Short essay: Using case study, discuss ethical
decision making framework (Constitutional Paradigm,
Categorical Imperative, Doctrine of Double Effect or
Principle of Utility)
– Short answer questions to validate knowledge of core
concepts…
• Example 1: Describe the major legal constraints on military
force and give an example of each
• Example 2: Describe differences between Jeremy Bentham’s
and John Stuart Mills theory of Utilitarianism