DOCSLIB.ORG

Moral Evaluation in Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Moral Evaluation in Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas MORAL EVALUATION IN ALBERT THE GREAT AND THOMAS AQUINAS A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by David William Zettel December 2018 © 2018 David William Zettel ABSTRACT Moral Evaluation in Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas David William Zettel Cornell University 2018 Two different methods for morally evaluating actions can be found in Albert the Great's works. The first, which I call the stages theory, requires that an act be evaluated in three stages: 1) its generic quality, or type; 2) its circumstances; and 3) whether it proceeds from virtue or vice. According to this theory, an act might be generically good, but done badly, or generically bad, but done well. The second method is an all-or-nothing principle. It requires that an act be good in each of a number of ways in order for it to be good overall. I call it the Dionysian principle, after pseudo-Dionysius, who stated that good is from a single complete cause, while bad is from any particular defect. It is not clear how these two methods go together, and at least one formulation of the Dionysian principle appears to be inconsistent with the stages theory. Thomas Aquinas, who studied under Albert, resolves the tension between the two methods by rejecting the stages theory and embracing the Dionysian principle. I argue that this disagreement between Albert and Aquinas leads them to describe certain hard cases very differently. Albert can maintain that agents in resolvable moral dilemmas perform a bad action, although it is the right action in the circumstances; Aquinas cannot, but rather claims that the agent in an apparent dilemma does not in fact perform the act he appears to perform. Finally, I draw out these differences by comparing both the stages theory and the Dionysian principle to certain Stoic antecedents. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH David Zettel obtained a BA in philosophy from the University of Waterloo in 2006. In 2008 he obtained an MA in philosophy from the University of Ottawa. His master's thesis was on Thomas Aquinas in the virtue of courage. In 2018 he obtained his PhD in philosophy from Cornell University. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It is with deep gratitude that I wish to acknowledge the people who made this dissertation possible. Scott MacDonald, Charles Brittain, and Tad Brennan generously served as my committee, providing invaluable comments and advice. Andrew Chignell, now at Princeton, was on my committee for most of my time as a student at Cornell, and I am grateful for his comments and guidance, especially at the earlier stages of the project. I am particularly indebted to Bruno Tremblay and David Twetten, who provided crucial suggestions and encouragement. Pamela Hannah in the Cornell philosophy department helped me through the maze of administrative requirements needed to complete my degree. My wife's parents, Ustine and Ophelia, were an enormous help, looking after our family and giving me time to write. My parents, Bob and Monica, have supported me throughout my studies; I would not have made it to this point without them. Clara and Anna, my two young daughters, having filled my life with joy, also inspired me to persevere in my writing. I dedicate this dissertation to my wife, Candida Jane Maria Ustine. Her love, support, and unwavering belief in me are a tremendous and altogether unmerited gift. என் அன்பே, என் மணமகபே, உன் அன்ꯁ 뮿க அழகான鏁. Table of Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 Historical Background ........................................................................................................ 6 Albert's Life and Works ...................................................................................................... 9 Chapter 1: Generic Goodness ........................................................................................... 14 1.A Generic Good before Albert ................................................................................... 14 1.B Generic Goodness in the DNB ............................................................................... 24 1.C Generic Goodness in the SDB ................................................................................ 34 1.D Generic Goodness in Albert's Sentences Commentary .......................................... 39 1.E Generic Goodness in Super Ethica and Ethica....................................................... 48 Chapter 2: Moral Circumstances ...................................................................................... 52 2.A Albert's Account of Moral Circumstances in DNB and SDB ................................ 53 2.B The Dionysian Principle in the SDB ...................................................................... 60 2.C Intention in DNB and SDB .................................................................................... 61 2.D Moral Circumstances and Intention in Albert's Sentences Commentary ............... 74 2.E Moral Circumstances in Super Ethica .................................................................. 104 2.F Moral Circumstances in Ethica ............................................................................ 119 2.G Generic Goodness and Moral Circumstances in Summa Theologiae .................. 134 2.H The Dionysian Principle in Summa Theologiae ................................................... 143 Chapter 3. The Stages Theory vs. the Dionysian Principle ............................................ 148 3.A. Comparing the Stages Theory and the Dionysian Principle ............................... 149 3.B Comparing Albert to Thomas Aquinas ................................................................ 162 3.C Generic Goodness and the Dionysian Principle in Aquinas' Sentences Commentary ..................................................................................................................................... 165 3.D Aquinas' Mature Theory ...................................................................................... 171 Interior and Exterior Acts ....................................................................................... 172 Generic Goodness ................................................................................................... 177 Moral Circumstances .............................................................................................. 181 The Dionysian Principle ......................................................................................... 184 Moral Indifference in Albert and Aquinas .............................................................. 190 3.E Revisiting the Judge who Condemns an Innocent Man ....................................... 195 3.F. Stoic Connections ................................................................................................ 205 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 218 Bibliography ................................................................................................................... 223 1 Introduction Albert the Great's ethics is an ethics of virtue. In his two earliest ethical treatises, De natura boni (DNB) and Summa de bono (SDB), however, Albert begins by discussing goodness in its widest sense before proceeding to discuss moral goodness, beginning with the features of good and bad actions. This is not accidental; Albert builds his theory of the virtues on his metaphysics of action. As we shall see, Albert thinks that human actions are structured in a particular way, and that the moral evaluation of an action requires taking into account the different parts of that structure. Consider two important questions about the moral act: 1) "What shall I do?" and 2) "Was this action right or wrong?" The first question provides action guidance. The second gives action assessment: was this action right or wrong? Was it praiseworthy? Merely permissible, or supererogatory? Yet these two questions, although related, are distinct. A moral theory might direct an agent to perform an action while denying that the action is right, as for example in the case of a resolvable, self-imposed moral dilemma.1 Now Albert does not distinguish explicitly between action guidance and action assessment. Nevertheless, his treatment of the morality of actions both at the generic level and at the level of circumstances is largely framed in terms of the evaluation or assessment of actions. Albert deals much more explicitly with action guidance in his discussions of prudence, or practical wisdom. There he approaches action from the perspective of the agent's psychology: the practically wise person has a particular kind of 1 See Hursthouse (1999), 49-51. 2 knowledge, Albert thinks, and she deliberates in particular ways. My focus in this dissertation will be primarily on action assessment, or evaluation. In framing my discussion this way I do not mean to imply that Albert's prudens does not take into account the generic quality or the moral circumstances of an action when she deliberates about it. It seems likely that these are exactly the sorts of considerations that will enter her mind, and I find no reason to think Albert would deny it. But he devotes considerable attention to our assessment of actions, and I will follow his lead in focusing on Albert on action assessment or evaluation.2 I contend that Albert
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ia Q. 79 A. 12 Whether Synderesis Is a Special Power of the Soul Distinct
    Whether synderesis is a special power of the soul distinct from the others? Ia q. 79 a. 12 Objection 1. It would seem that “synderesis” is a proceeds from the understanding of certain things— special power, distinct from the others. For those things namely, those which are naturally known without any which fall under one division, seem to be of the same investigation on the part of reason, as from an im- genus. But in the gloss of Jerome on Ezech. 1:6, “syn- movable principle—and ends also at the understand- deresis” is divided against the irascible, the concupisci- ing, inasmuch as by means of those principles naturally ble, and the rational, which are powers. Therefore “syn- known, we judge of those things which we have discov- deresis” is a power. ered by reasoning. Now it is clear that, as the specula- Objection 2. Further, opposite things are of the tive reason argues about speculative things, so that prac- same genus. But “synderesis” and sensuality seem to tical reason argues about practical things. Therefore we be opposed to one another because “synderesis” always must have, bestowed on us by nature, not only specu- incites to good; while sensuality always incites to evil: lative principles, but also practical principles. Now the whence it is signified by the serpent, as is clear from first speculative principles bestowed on us by nature do Augustine (De Trin. xii, 12,13). It seems, therefore, not belong to a special power, but to a special habit, that ‘synderesis’ is a power just as sensuality is.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Conscience Likes Dogmatic Definitions*
    Why Conscience Likes Dogmatic Definitions* T. L.SUTTOR OR us, the word "theology" implies method and system, analysis and Fsynthesis, Greek terms, all of them. Now it is extremely interesting that Aquinas, who more than any other Christian writer might be expected to value the qualities in question, in fact largely avoids using such terms and others like them, including the word "theology" itself. He prefers the strictly scriptural terms: wisdom, understanding, knowledge, doctrine. The "system" and "-ology" words are our words, modem post-renaissance words, Descartes-Kant-Hegel words. This modem desire to discipline linguistic usage in all fields, including religious experience, is no doubt a fine thing, and we are not wrong to attribute such a desire to Aquinas and his heirs. But what is the unifying principle of theological system, guiding methodical analysis of the mysteries of Christianity? How can we make sure that the system we get into print is in truth the wisdom and spiritual understanding which Paul prayed down on the Colossians? The unifying principle, the universal font of theological illumination, is simply purity of conscience. The pure of heart see God; the unseen world is in a certain manner evident to their faith; the objects of their Christian hope have body and substance. John 8: 12 reads: "He that follows me does not walk in darkness." St. Thomas paraphrases: As the gift of love is in all who have the grace that makes men acceptable to God, so too is the gift of understanding ( Ila-Ilae, 8, 4c) . And theology, in this sense of spiritual understanding, is inseparable from the process of Christian salavation.
    [Show full text]
  • Affect and Ascent in the Theology of Bonaventure
    The Force of Union: Affect and Ascent in the Theology of Bonaventure The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Davis, Robert. 2012. The Force of Union: Affect and Ascent in the Theology of Bonaventure. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:9385627 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA © 2012 Robert Glenn Davis All rights reserved. iii Amy Hollywood Robert Glenn Davis The Force of Union: Affect and Ascent in the Theology of Bonaventure Abstract The image of love as a burning flame is so widespread in the history of Christian literature as to appear inevitable. But as this dissertation explores, the association of amor with fire played a precise and wide-ranging role in Bonaventure’s understanding of the soul’s motive power--its capacity to love and be united with God, especially as that capacity was demonstrated in an exemplary way through the spiritual ascent and death of St. Francis. In drawing out this association, Bonaventure develops a theory of the soul and its capacity for transformation in union with God that gives specificity to the Christian desire for self-abandonment in God and the annihilation of the soul in union with God. Though Bonaventure does not use the language of the soul coming to nothing, he describes a state of ecstasy or excessus mentis that is possible in this life, but which constitutes the death and transformation of the soul in union with God.
    [Show full text]
  • Law, Natural Law, and Human Intelligence: Living the Correlation
    Catholic University Law Review Volume 55 Issue 3 Spring 2006 Article 8 2006 Law, Natural Law, and Human Intelligence: Living the Correlation Patrick McKinley Brennan Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview Recommended Citation Patrick M. Brennan, Law, Natural Law, and Human Intelligence: Living the Correlation, 55 Cath. U. L. Rev. 731 (2006). Available at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview/vol55/iss3/8 This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Catholic University Law Review by an authorized editor of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LAW, NATURAL LAW, AND HUMAN INTELLIGENCE: LIVING THE CORRELATION PatrickMcKinley Brennan' "'Of Law there can be no less acknowledged, than that her seat is the bosom of God, her voice the harmony of the world."" I. WIT AND THE NATURAL LAW, THE QUARTUM QUID We are created "to serve [God] wittily, in the tangle of [our] mind[s]," Sir Thomas More declares in Robert Bolt's play A Man for All Seasons.2 More began his adult life of service of God in the self-imposed silence of the London Charterhouse, and that same life was ended for him, of course, in the isolation of the Tower of London and through the violence of Tower Hill, on account of a self-imposed silence of different inspiration. Between Charterhouse and Tower, Thomas More was as cunning as a serpent to use what considerable wit he could muster to serve God, Church, family, and state, including through law.
    [Show full text]
  • Mark Mcgovern
    to n erstan zng• atura Mark McGovern Not only is synderesis a key to Aquinas's conception of natural law, as the title of this article suggests, but also is, in my judgment, an antidote to the modem malaise (largely engendered by the positivists) that any ethical statement is correctly reduced to a matter of feel­ ing. Commenting on synderesis and its connection with natural law should clear away a number of moral confusions, even some held by contemporary Christian ethicians. St. Thomas's account of synderesis can be ascertained by a simple analogy which he himself employs. There is a natural habitus in the order of speculative knowledge, namely, intellectus, by which the human mind (or soul, if you will) is enabled to recognize immediately the truth of first principles in the speculative sphere. Likewise, there is in the order of practical knowledge a natural habitus, namely, synderesis, by which the human soul immediately recognizes the truth of first principles in the moral order. In both cases it is not the first principles which are implanted in the soul, but rather what is present in the soul from birth is a natural habitus by which the human soul recognizes the truth of first principles. If it were true, as unfmtunate\y some theologians and philosophers in seminary lead me and other ~\.\Kk\\\.~ \.() oc\\~'-"~, tb.at tb.e fn:st \)t\nci\)leS are im\)lanted in the soul, then it would indeed be difficult to explain why there is not unanimous agreement on the first principles in the moral order.
    [Show full text]
  • Synderesis and Conscience: Stoicism and Its Medieval Transformations
    Дискурсы этики SYNDERESIS AND CONSCIENCE: STOICISM AND ITS MEDIEVAL TRANSFORMATIONS Marcia L. Colish Author argues that the conscience is a theme frequently flagged as a key aspect of Stoicism. Beyond mere consciousness, our self-aware- ness as agents, moral and otherwise, conscience specifies the ethical norms we honor in judging our experience and acting on it. Scholars have studied how the Stoics think we acquire these norms, how we ap- ply them in concrete individual cases, and how we estimate this prac- tice, prospectively or retrospectively, examining our conscience and steeling ourselves to the difficulties of acting in its light. Whether these processes depend on Ancient Stoic monopsychism – the notion that the soul has no subdivisions or infrarational faculties – has also drawn attention. In tracking its medieval fortunes, whether in Stoic or modi- fied form, we will note as well some of the related ideas with which this doctrine traveled. Conscience is a theme frequently flagged as a key aspect of Stoicism. Beyond mere consciousness, our self-awareness as agents, moral and otherwise, conscience specifies the ethi- cal norms we honor in judging our experience and acting on it. Scholars have studied how the Stoics think we acquire these norms, how we apply them in concrete individual cases, and how we estimate this practice, prospectively or retrospectively, examining our conscience and steeling ourselves to the difficul- ties of acting in its light. Whether these processes depend on Ancient Stoic monopsychism – the notion that the soul has no subdivisions or infrarational faculties – has also drawn attention. Less fully explored is whether the Stoics think we can act against conscience, and if so, why and how.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Law and Natural Rights Second Edition
    CLARENDON LAW SERIES Edited by Paul Craig Works of John Finnis available from Oxford University Press Reason in Action Collected Essays: Volume I Intention and Identity Collected Essays: Volume II Human Rights and Common Good Collected Essays: Volume III Philosophy of Law Collected Essays: Volume IV Religion and Public Reasons Collected Essays: Volume V Natural Law and Natural Rights Second Edition Aquinas Moral, Political, and Legal Theory Nuclear Deterrence, Morality and Realism with Joseph Boyle and Germain Grisez NATURAL LAW AND NATURAL RIGHTS Second Edition JOHN FINNIS 1 3 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford ox2 6dp Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide in Oxford New York Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto With offices in Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., New York ß J.M. Finnis 2011 The moral rights of the author have been asserted Database right Oxford University Press (maker) Crown copyright material is reproduced under Class Licence Number C01P0000148 with the permission of OPSI and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland First published 2011 (first edition 1980) All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Synderesis in Late Medieval Philosophy and the Wittenberg Reformers Pekka Kärkkäinen Abstract the Present Article Discusses
    1 This is an Accepted Manuscript an article published in the British Journal for the History of Philosophy 06/09/2012, available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09608788.2012.718866 Synderesis in Late Medieval Philosophy and the Wittenberg Reformers Pekka Kärkkäinen Abstract The present article discusses the concept of synderesis in the late medieval universities of Er- furt and Leipzig and its the later developments in Wittenberg. The comparison between Bar- tholomaeus Arnoldi of Usingen in Erfurt and Johannes Peyligk in Leipzig shows that school traditions played an important role in the exposition of synderesis by the late medieval scho- lastic natural philosophers. However, Jodocus Trutfetter’s example warns against overem- phasising the importance of the school traditions and reminds us of the manifold history of medieval discussions on synderesis, which were more or less familiar to many authors of this period. Finally, the diverse references to synderesis in the texts of Martin Luther, Johannes Bernhardi of Feldkirch and Philip Melanchthon reveal no uniform relationship with late me- dieval discussions, but rather indicate various ways of adopting scholastic ideas and trans- forming them in the context of humanist and reformation thinking. 2 Synderesis: from the Late Medieval Viae to the Wittenberg Reformers 1. Introduction In 1977 Michael Baylor published a work entitled ‘Action and Person, Conscience in Late Scholasticism and the Young Luther’. In it, he examines the diverse late medieval theories concerning notions of synderesis, conscience and practical reason, which are concepts com- monly used to describe the psychological process of forming moral judgements.
    [Show full text]
  • Summa Theologiae 1, Q. 79, Aa. 11-13 Article 11 Are Speculative
    Summa Theologiae 1, q. 79, aa. 11-13 Article 11 Are speculative reason and practical reason diverse powers? It seems that speculative reason and practical reason are diverse powers: Objection 1: As De Anima 2 makes clear, the apprehensive power and the power that effects movement are diverse powers. But the speculative intellect is purely apprehensive, whereas the practical intellect is a power that effects movement. Therefore, they are diverse powers. Objection 2: Powers are diversified by the diverse natures of their objects. But the object of the speculative intellect is the true, whereas the object of the practical intellect is the good; and these objects differ in nature. Therefore, the speculative intellect and practical intellect are diverse powers. Objection 3: In the intellective part of the soul, the practical intellect is related to the speculative intellect in the way that, in the sentient part of the soul, the estimative power is related to the power of imagining. But as was explained above (q. 78, a. 4), the estimative power differs from the power of imagining as one power from another. Therefore, the practical intellect and speculative intellect differ in the same way. But contrary to this: De Anima 3 says that the speculative intellect becomes practical by extension. But it is not the case that one power is changed into another. Therefore, the speculative intellect and practical intellect are not diverse powers. I respond: The practical intellect and speculative intellect are not diverse powers. The reason for this, as was explained above (q. 77, a. 3), is that something related incidentally to the nature of a power’s object does not diversify the power.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on Aquinas & Politics 1. Thomas Aquinas A. Synderesis V
    Dr. Sean Hannan MacEwan University Winter 2017 Notes on Aquinas & Politics 1. Thomas Aquinas a. Synderesis v. Conscience i. Synderesis (I.79.12): Synderesis is not a power (potentia), but rather a “characteristic disposition” (habitus). More specifically, it is that characteristic disposition by which we have access to the first principles of practical life. (cf. Aristotelian archai) Practical reasoning, like theoretical reasoning, must proceed from certain first principles which it itself cannot found. Theoretically, these are the “understanding of principles” (NE 6.6). Practically, they are synderesis. 1. Synderesis is a strangely obscure word. Is it a corruption of a more regularly observable syn- word? Something to do with understanding, perhaps? Is the whole history of synderetic analysis rooted in Thomas’ (and Albert’s) idiosyncratic reimagining of Jerome’s Ezekiel commentary? (Wherein synderesis gets to be the allegorical meaning of the one of the four divine ‘faces’…) ii. Conscience (I.79.13): Conscience is an act, not a power. (Or a habitus, apparently—these are the three candidates, according to Aquinas: actus, potentia, habitus.) More specifically, it is an act of knowing—an act that ‘connects knowledge with things.’ Thus a folk etymology emerges: con- science as ‘knowing-together-with.’ In the case of practical matters, we connect our knowledge to our actions. Thus conscience takes on three roles: 1. Bearing Witness: declaring that we have or have not done x. 2. Morally Obliging: declaring that we should or should not do x. 3. Excusing or Accusing: declaring that we should have or should not have done x. iii. Confusion of Conscience with Synderesis arises because we often confuse cause (underlying habitus of Synderesis) with effect (actus of Conscience).
    [Show full text]
  • A Study on Conscience: the Content and Function
    Duquesne University Duquesne Scholarship Collection Electronic Theses and Dissertations Summer 1-1-2016 A Study on Conscience: The onC tent and Function Nalan Sarac Follow this and additional works at: https://dsc.duq.edu/etd Recommended Citation Sarac, N. (2016). A Study on Conscience: The onC tent and Function (Doctoral dissertation, Duquesne University). Retrieved from https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/105 This One-year Embargo is brought to you for free and open access by Duquesne Scholarship Collection. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Duquesne Scholarship Collection. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A STUDY ON CONSCIENCE: THE CONTENT AND FUNCTION A Dissertation Submitted to the McAnulty College & Graduate School of Liberal Arts Duquesne University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Nalan Saraç August 2016 Copyright by Nalan Saraç 2016 A STUDY ON CONSCIENCE: THE CONTENT AND FUNCTION By Nalan Saraç Approved July 7, 2016 ________________________________ ________________________________ Ronald Polansky Thérèse Bonin Professor of Philosophy Associate Professor of Philosophy (Committee Chair) (Committee Member) ________________________________ Jennifer Ann Bates Professor of Philosophy Committee Member) ________________________________ ________________________________ James Swindal, Dean Ronald Polansky The McAnulty College and Graduate Chair, Department of Philosophy School of Liberal Arts Professor of Philosophy Professor of Philosophy iii ABSTRACT A STUDY ON CONSCIENCE: THE CONTENT AND FUNCTION By Nalan Saraç August 2016 Dissertation supervised by Ronald Polansky The aim of this study is to contribute to the understanding of conscience by critically examining turning points of the traditionalist approach that conceptualizes conscience primarily as a cognitive capacity.
    [Show full text]
  • The Thomistic Conception of Natural Law: Does It Commit the Naturalistic Fallacy?
    Running head: THOMISTIC NATURAL LAW 1 The Thomistic Conception of Natural Law: Does It Commit the Naturalistic Fallacy? Maria Magdalen Owen A Senior Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation in the Honors Program Liberty University Spring 2011 THOMISTIC NATURAL LAW 2 Acceptance of Senior Honors Thesis This Senior Honors Thesis is accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation from the Honors Program of Liberty University. ______________________________ David Baggett, Ph.D. Thesis Chair ______________________________ Mark Foreman, Ph.D. Committee Member _______________________________ Gai Ferdon, Ph.D. Committee Member ________________________________ Marilyn Gadomski, Ph.D. Assistant Honors Director ________________________________ Date THOMISTIC NATURAL LAW 3 Abstract Does Thomistic Natural Law theory commit the naturalistic fallacy? Ralph McInerny seems to think that Thomistic Natural Law, as Thomas Aquinas himself articulates it, escapes any potentially defeating criticism derived from the Naturalistic fallacy as described most notably by G. E. Moore and David Hume, which states that morality is not derivable from any natural property. The naturalistic fallacy, if successful in its purpose, deals a fatal blow to the school of moral philosophy that strives to adhere to traditional Thomism. In response to the criticism rooted in the Naturalistic fallacy, scholars like John Finnis insist that Thomistic Natural Law must, at the very least, undergo a re-articulation to answer this challenge. Their theory, new Natural Law Theory, subtly, but significantly departs from Thomism by replacing the telos with a deontological ethic. Thomistic Natural Law, traditionally understood, has much to offer contemporary philosophy in its own right—independent of newer, similar theories, and does not need any major revision to answer the challenge posed by either version of the naturalistic fallacy.
    [Show full text]