UNIVERSITY OF CALOOCAN CITY

Biglang Awa St., Corner Catleya St., EDSA, Caloocan City

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
ETHICS
 
SUBJECT CODE: GED008
TOPIC OR LESSON: The Natural Law, St. Thomas Aquinas
WEEK: 4
SUB-TOPIC/S: a. Etsi Deus Non Daretur
b. Conscience and Natural law
c. Three Contemporary Questions
d. The Relational and Perfection of Love in Aquinas

AN OVERVIEW: THE NATURAL LAW

The natural law is a part of Divine Law understood by men through reason.  God
created the world according to Natural Laws – predictable, God-driven systems
whereby life is sustained and everything functions smoothly, the reason why Aquinas
recognized basic goods such as life, reproduction, educating one’s offspring, seek God,
live in society, avoid offense and shun ignorance.

For Aquinas, we don’t need the bible or religion class, or church in order to
understand the natural law.  Instead, our instinct shows us the basic good, and reason
allows us to drive the natural law from them.  The Natural Law involves inclination and
reason.  Inclination needed to recognize what is good, and reason needed to know how
to pursue goods.  If the moral law comes from God’s Eternal Law, the Divine Law is
good and avoids evil.  But, how do we know that one is acting in accordance with the
good?  In Natural Law ethics, conscience serves as the guide in making moral
decisions.  But, how do we know that one’s actions obey conscience?

There is a connection between law and morals and that law must be just and fair,
therefore, man-made law must conform to higher principles of right conduct
discoverable through reason.  Thus, in this module, we will learn that reason is the
source of the moral law and it directs us towards the good which is the ultimate goal of
the person’s actions.

 
 LEARNING
OUTCOMES
At the end of the module 4, learners can:
a. Demonstrate knowledge gained from the natural law and its relation to
ethics;
b. Explain how natural law is an imprint of the Divine Will on the free person,
and;
c. Observe and practice the role of natural law in crafting an ethical life.

LEARNING
OBJECTIVES
At the end of the module 4, learners should be able to:
a, Describe the two functions of conscience;
b. List four characteristics of natural law, and;
c. Justify why natural law lies in human intelligence.

Terminology to Consider:

● Natural law - is a theory in ethics and philosophy that says that human beings
possess intrinsic values that govern our reasoning and behavior
● Conscience - the sense or consciousness of the moral goodness or
blameworthiness of one's own conduct, intentions, or character together with a
feeling of obligation to do right or be good.
● Etsi Deus Non Daretur - translated means 'as though God did not exist.

ENGAGE

DIRECTIONS: Kindly retort the following questions in a concise manner (maximum of

three sentences).

Note that in this part you are encouraged to underwrite what you feel.

a. What does it entail when one says natural? Conscience?

______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

b. When was the last time you felt “conscientious”?

______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

EXPLORE

Activity 2DIRECTIONS: Kindly read the short article found below. Share your view and
perspective towards it in a concise manner (maximum of three sentences). Note that in
this part you are encouraged to be factual with what you perceive.

In October 2016, newspapers reported that Pantaleon Alvarez, Speaker of the

House of Representatives, was intending to draft a bill which would amend the country’s
Family Code, thereby allowing the legalization of same-sex unions. This would result in
the possibility of two men together or two women together being identified as a couple
with rights guaranteed and protected by the law. However, as one newspaper report
revealed, even before anything could be formally proposed, other fellow legislators had
already expressed to the media their refusal to support any such initiative.

The reasons given in the news article vary, ranging from the opinion that seeing
two men kiss is unsightly, to the statement that there is something “irregular” about
belonging to the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, transgender (LGBT) community, and to the
judgment that two people of the same sex being together is unnatural.

We are used to hearing people justify doing something by making the appeal that
what they maintain is what is “natural,” and therefore acceptable. Likewise, people
would judge something as unacceptable on the basis that it is supposedly “unnatural.”
Thus, we are no longer surprised when we hear people condemn and label many
different things as “unnatural”: maybe receiving blood transfusions, eating meat, or, as
our news report shows, engaging in sexual relations that one might consider deviant.
We also realize that sometimes we might find ourselves astonished or perplexed as to
what different people might consider “unnatural.”

In order to proceed, it is therefore necessary to ask: “What do the words natural

and unnatural mean? Sometimes, the word “natural” seems to be used to refer to some
kind of intuition that a person has, one which is so apparently true to him that is
unquestioned. For example, a woman may claim that it is simply “unnatural” to any kind
of insect, and what this means is that she personally finds herself averse to the idea of
doing so. In other instances, the word is used to justify a certain way of behaving by
seeing its likeness somewhere in the natural world. For example, a man might claim
that it is okay for him to have more than one sexual partner, since, in a pride of lions,
the alpha male gets to mate with all the she-lions. In yet other instances, the word
“natural” is an

appeal to something instinctual without it being directed by reason. For example, a man
may deem it all right if he were to urinate just anywhere because after all he sees it as
“natural” functions of humans. Lastly, we also easily find people using the word “natural”
to refer to what seems common to them given their particular environment. For
instance, Filipina may suppose that eating three full meals of rice and ulam every day is
what is “natural” because everyone she knows behaves in that way.

EXPLAIN

Etsi Deus Non Daretur

 Thomas Aquinas begins from the
standpoint of faith. His perspective
presupposes the existence of a God who
is the author (source) and the goal (end)
of all reality. This Creator for Thomas,
however, relates in freedom to recognize
through reason, the very principle of
foundations of all things. In accordance
with this functional knowledge, the
human person can choose to act in such
a way that is worthy of one’s very reality.
On who can reach the wisdom at the very
heart of all things is obliged to act in
accordance with his/her dignity. The
human being then is said to be gifted with
“the ability to know the highest good” that engages him/her in freedom in “choosing to
act on the good that he/she ought to do.” Freedom here is knowing the best goal and
being able to reach for it through decisive action. This is expressed interiorly, that is in
the very heart, of every human person as the dictate of “doing good and avoiding evil.”

The reality of the human person who is able, through his/her intellect, to decide in
freedom and, through his/her will, to move himself/herself voluntarily in accordance with
the good that he/she can follow the very will of God who has “created man in His own
image” (Genesis 1, 27). Man in His fullness shares life with plants and animals but goes
beyond them in his voluntary action and freedom in decisions.

Human freedom for St. Thomas, therefore is an imprint of the divine will in the
very being of the human person. The Divine Will can be understood as governing all
that is; man’s task is to act in such a way that his/her participation in the full unfolding of
nature directs it to fulfillment.

This law impinges on the very freedom of the human being to know his/her
options and voluntarily will to take action. The rational human person’s participation,
ability to discern what is good from what is not, is the very presence of the dictates of
the law within him/her, and is also the imprint on him/her of the Creator (Divine Will).

Etsi Deus non daretur is an expression that highlights the validity of this ethical
system with or without faith in the Creator God. Literally, Etsi Deus non daretur means
“even if there is no God.” This implies that the wisdom of the ethical system that is
natural
law is valid and binding for the human person even if we bracket belief in God.
However, it has to be noted that Etsi Deus non daretur does not advocate atheism or
protest against the faith.

Conscience and Natural Law

The ability of man to know is important in

his/her acting ethically. Hence, if one follows St.
Thomas’ discussion on conscience, one is
inclined to conclude that “it is the proper
functioning of reason in moving the human
person towards an end goal that is fitting of
his/her dignity.” One cannot do the right if one
does not know what it is. The famous dictate
then to follow the conscience absolutely is tied
up to an obligation to educate it. However, not
knowing St. Thomas Aquinas is not an excuse.
Even if one does not know, he/she is obliged to
know. If one acts badly out of ignorance and
does not act to rectify the situation by bothering to learn, that person is
accountable according to the Angelic Doctor.

On the other hand, there are different kinds of conscience that may lead us to
wrongdoing: callous, perplexed, scrupulous, and ignorant/uninformed. The
ignorant/uninformed conscience simply lacks education, while the perplexed
conscience needs guidance in sorting out one’s confusion. More so, the callous
conscience results in the long-time persistence in doing evil that the self is no longer
concerned whether he/she does good or bad. Lastly, the scrupulous conscience fails
to trust one’s ability to do good and hence, overly concerns itself with avoiding what is
bad to the point of seeing wrong where there really is none.

There are four characteristics of natural law, the universal, it is the human nature
which is shared by all men, though realized differently according to their respective
culture; obligatory, because the tendencies of our human nature are the laws of our

desires and actuations, which we can not ignore without dire consequences;
recognizable, because man, being self-reflexive, is aware of his nature of what he is
and what he is capable of and what is expected of him by his own kind; and immutable
and unchangeable, because, although change is a rule of life, human nature in its
essentiality and substantiality remains permanent and unchangeable.

Three Contemporary Questions

There are relevant questions that can help the Filipino student appreciate Thomistic
Natural Law. These three questions: Who am I?; Who do I want to be?; and How can I
get there?, have originated from the writing of Alasdair Macintyre.

Who am I? This refers to the identity of the human person. If one is endowed
with his/her own facticity, history, and abilities, his/her present reality is accessible to
him/her through self-knowledge and reflection. The reality of human identity is that it is
something defined yet also always in process.

Who do I want to be? The human person’s self-knowledge is dynamic, that is, it
is always open to the direction set by what one wants to make himself/herself. Self-
knowledge here is malleable towards self-determination. Ethical acts give direction
through freedom to build up the self towards a particular goal.

How can I get there? This fully utilizes the sound judgment of human reason
and evaluates the best route to get to the goal decided upon. The last question breaks
down the task to be done into the particulars of actions and daily routine.

The human person does not only access reason to assess his/her personal
identity and personal goal; he/she is also gifted with the will to command the self to go
through the steps and, hence, be able to do the transition from knowledge to a fully
determined self.

The Relational and Perfection of Love in

Aquinas

Thomistic natural law is not Christian simply

because it is an ethics reconcilable or
compatible with faith. It is a disciplined
system that finds ultimate foundation and
perfection in the reality of God. While
through Etsi Deus non daretur we are
afforded the autonomy of a reasonable
ethics independent from faith, ultimately this
ethics is given full meaning and

perfection in a relationship with God. The highest perfection of man for St. Thomas is in
his/her wanting to be with God. In other words that are used by believers, “The ethical
man is not the perfect man but one who wants to be saved by cooperating in freedom
with what is attainable for him/her.”
 ELABORAT
E
DIRECTIONS: As discussed above, Aquinas has given much consideration to natural
law. With this, choose one topic out of the many topics/issues found below. Kindly
provide your own reflection and insight (apply an evidence for justification) in a concise
manner (maximum of ten sentences). The rubric for evaluation is provided below.

Note that in this part you are encouraged to think logically.

Choose one among these topics:

a. abortion;

b. living-in together even if not married;

c. pre-marital sex (engaging to sex before marriage); and

d. divorce.

1. Is your chosen topic/issue morally acceptable? Why or why not? Share your
reflection and insight. Attach/include an evidence for justification (can be a Republic Act,
Bible verse/s, etc.).

______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

RUBRIC FOR EVALUATION SCORE

 RELEVANCE
3 – The 2 – The 1 – The 0.5 – The 0–
explanation is explanation is explanation is explanation is
directly relevant to quite relevant not clear and Has no
relevant to the the topic. to the topic. has a very explanation
topic. Every Most of the Only a few of rough
detail points details the details transition of
toward the contribute to contribute to idea. The
topic. the the details are not
development development relevant to the
of the topic. of the topic. topic.

EVIDENCE/
ARGUMENT 3 – The 2 – The 1 – The 0.5 – The 0–
explanation explanation explanation explanation
shows at least shows at shows 3 to 5 shows at most Has no
9 correct/valid least 6 to 8 correct/valid 2 correct/valid explanation
evidences to correct/valid evidences to evidences to
support evidences to support support
his/her support his/her his/her
answer. his/her answer. answer.
answer.

CLARITY
2 – The 1.5 – The 1 – The 0.5 – The 0–
explanation is explanation is explanation is explanation is
clear, has a clear, has a somewhat not clear and Has no
very good flow good clear and has has a very explanation
of discussion, transition, a rough rough
every detail is most of the transition transition of
connected to details are from one idea ideas.
each other. connected to to another.
each other.

TECHNI-
CALITY 2 – The 1.5 – The 1 – The 1.5 – The 0–
explanation explanation explanation explanation
has no error in has 1 to 2 has 3 to 4 has at least 5 Has no
grammar, errors in errors in errors in explanation
spelling, and grammar, grammar, grammar,
punctuations. spelling, and spelling, and spelling, and
punctuations. punctuations. punctuations.

OVERALL SCORE:

EVALUATE

DIRECTIONS: identify the following concepts being described. Write your answer in the
blank space provided at the end of the statement. ( Note that in this part you are encouraged to
remember the topic/s discussed.)
 1. It is an ordinance of reason, promulgated for the common good by one who has
charge of society. __________
2. It is a law as the inner law of our true being, of our essentially created nature,
which demands that we actualize what follows from it. ___________
3. It refers to the law as the exemplar of divine and wisdom as directing all actions
and movements. ___________
4. It is the practical judgment of reason telling us what should be done because it is
good, or what should be avoided because it is evil. _____________
5. A medieval friar whose work reconciling ancient Greek and Christian
philosophies developed the theory of natural law. ________________________
6. This approach to ethics assumes a society comprising individuals whose own
good is inextricably linked to the good of the community. ___________
7. It refers to a set of universal rules that should apply to everyone. ____________
8. A habit of doing an evil acquired through the repetition of an evil act. ________
9. An Ancient Greek philosopher and scientist who is still considered one of the
greatest thinkers in politics, psychology and ethics. __________________
10. A set of rules for action, known without revelation and legislated by God.
___________

REFERENCE
S
Prescribed Textbook
Pasco, Marc Oliver, Suarez, Fulluente V. and Rodriquez, Agustin Martin G. (2018): Ethics C & E
Publishing Company

References
Agapay, Ramon R.”Ethics and the Filipino”, 2nd Edition (2008), National Book Store, Mandaluyong City.

Albert m, et.al (2018), “Ethics Foundations of   Moral Valuation,”: Rex Book Store

Bulaong, Oscar G., Jr, Calano, Mark Joseph T, and Lagliva Albert m, et.al (2018), “Ethics Foundations of
Moral Valuation,”: Rex Book Store

Glenn, Paul J. (1988), Ethics: A Class Manual in Moral Philosophy

Grassin, Victor (1992), “Moral Reasoning: Ethical Theory and Some Contemporary Moral problems, 2nd
ed.: Jersey, Prentice Hall, pp-11-47

De Finance, Joseph (1991) An Ethical Inquiry

Grassin, Victor (1992), “Moral Reasoning: Ethical Theory and Some Contemporary Moral problems, 2nd
ed.: Jersey, Prentice Hall, pp-11-47

Keenan, James (1992) Goodness and Rightness in Thomas Aquinas

Servias Pinckaers (1995) Sources of Christian Ethics

ADDITIONAL
MATERIALS

PREPARED BY:

JOSHUA JAY O. EDEN, LPT

ROSALIE D. ESTEBAN, MAEd

MARILYN M. MIRAFLOR, Ed.D.

JOVANNY L. CORNELIA, DEM

FLORA B. SAN MIGUEL