>> Welcome back to Intro to Philosophy
1010, the summer of 2019 session.
So our book is "Introduction
to World Philosophy".
And in this video, we are going to
compare St. Thomas Aquinas and Plato.
The question isn't a question this time.
So this is Exam 4, Part A, question 3.
And it's just telling you to combine.
So combine St. Thomas Aquinas' concept of
natural law, especially his notion of the good
with Plato's concept of the idea of the
good in the cave allegory of the Republic,
and Plato's theory of absolute
ideas in the Phaedrus
to form a more complete version
of natural law theory.
You do not have to believe the
theory, just combine the elements
of the different readings logically.
So you're combining St. Thomas Aquinas, so
that's in Chapter 4.5.1 Summa Theologica
to Plato's cave allegory in
the Republic and the Phaedrus,
so those segments that we covered in this class.
So, Aquinas was basing his philosophy on
Aristotle, but also on Plato because--
and especially through St. Augustine.
So, St. Augustine came at
the end of the Roman Empire.
St. Thomas Aquinas came and he lived 1224 to
1274, so almost 1,000 years after Augustine.
Augustine was more of a Platonist.
And Aquinas, again, like to follow Aristotle.
And Aristotle's idea of the forms
are a little different than Plato's.
But when you combine Aquinas
with Plato, this is the overall--
what I'm looking for, the elements.
For Plato in the Phaedrus, we saw that he says
after death and before your next reincarnation,
your soul struggles to go to the
outermost heaven of the universe,
where it can perceive the
absolute ideas of justice,
and beauty, and goodness, and everything.
And that's the source of the material
world, the interior of the universe.
So, in the cave allegory, you're trying to--
this three-dimensional world that we live in,
our everyday world, which is illuminated
by the sun, is compared to the cave
where the prisoners are shackled.
And just to briefly overview to describe
his theory, his metaphysics, Socrates says,
imagine we are in a cave, prisoners chained
in a cave at birth, shackled head to foot,
forced to look at the back of a cave.
Behind them is a blazing fire above the
entrance and between them and the fire,
guards carry puppets up on sticks,
puppets of the different three-dimensional
figures out in the real world.
You know, whatever the case may be,
all the different species of being,
so that the prisoners and the guards,
their shadow is hidden by a wall,
a wall that comes up a little bit enough
to hide the guards but not the puppets.
So, the prisoners think the shadows on the wall
are reality, then someone takes the prisoner,
turns them around, they're
blinded by the fire light.
They can't see anything.
They think the shadows are still more real.
They're dragged up the rough and steep ascent.
They can see things at night.
They can see things in the-- in
puddles of water in the daytime.
Eventually, their eyes get
habituated enough to the light
that they can catch a glimpse of the sun itself.
And then they realize, oh, all
the in the cave was just shadows
and delusion and here's reality.
So then he's taken back to the cave,
he's blinded by the darkness,
people think he's insane.
They want to kill him if they could.
But eventually, his eyes
accustom themselves to the dark,
and he can understand the shadow game better--
10,000 times better than anybody else.
And his job is supposed to be to bring
other prisoners back out of the cave.
So the cave is what our world is.
The sun is like the fire in the cave.
This is a shadow.
The three-dimensional objects, our
bodies, everything we see are like shadows
of the absolute forms in
the eternal spiritual world.
So that's the cave allegory.
So to combine that with St. Thomas
Aquinas, I will now just read a little bit
of the introductory notes on page
124, so Aquinas on law and virtue.
So I'll just read a few--
I'll skip around a little bit.
So Aquinas bases his views on ethics, on those
of Aristotle, but he adds many innovations,
blending Aristotelian insights
into a Christian worldview.
He develops a comprehensive theory of
natural law that remains influential today.
So, Aquinas begins with Aristotle's idea
that human good depends on human nature,
to live well, to excel or flourish
is to fulfill one's function well.
So our function as human beings, according
to Aristotle, is to act according to reason.
And he says to act well,
we have to act virtuously.
Reason determines the golden mean
between two extremes of vice,
one of going too far, one
of not going far enough.
So for example, courage is the mean between
cowardice, which is not going far enough,
and rashness which is going too far.
Reason enables us to determine
the virtuous golden mean.
According to Aristotle, our function
specifically as humans is to reason.
We have a vegetative function, which we
hold in common with all living things.
Even plants just nourish themselves and grow.
We have sense perceptions,
which the animals have.
We have that in common with animals.
But the one thing humans have that
no other animal has is reason.
So, to function well, you have to perform
according to reason as a human being.
So that is-- So this is related
to Aquinas' natural law theory.
So the natural law is, what is the moral law?
How do you determine what's
ethical and what is not ethical?
You have to use reason, he's going to say, to
determine what's natural for the human form.
So God created human beings
for a specific purpose.
The specific purpose is to use our
reason ultimately to discern God's will
by studying the eternal law
that governs the universe.
So let me get back to the introductory notes.
So Aquinas adds God to this
Aristotelian picture.
God establishes the order of nature,
determining the nature of things.
God thus indirectly establishes not only
the physical laws that constitute the order
of nature, but also the natural
laws that free beings ought to obey.
Since human nature is distinctively rational,
law itself is essentially a matter of reason.
All right.
So you have to understand just the terms here
so-- And they write it a little bit confusingly.
So God thus indirectly establishes
not only the physical laws, well,
God directly establishes the physical
laws that constitute the order of nature.
And then from those, indirectly, God establishes
the natural laws that free beings ought to obey,
because God made humans rational.
And we can therefore use reason to
determine what human beings ought to do
by examining the eternal laws
of nature, the laws of physics,
the way God established the universe.
So you can see the moral order
and the physical order of things
because God formed things for a purpose.
And when they fulfill the function for
which God created them, that's good.
When they're not fulfilling
that function, then that's evil.
And so, for human beings, when we're fulfilling
the function for which God created us,
we're doing something ethically good.
And when we're going against
what it is reasonable
to assume a human form should
be doing, then that's evil.
So the eternal law is one term.
And then the law of nature is another term.
And they get-- it gets confusing
when they talk about--
All right, so the law of nature and natural law,
those are the two words, the
law of nature is physics.
So it says here, Aquinas distinguishes
several different kinds of law.
Eternal law is the law of nature, established
by God that governs the entire universe.
Everything in the universe obeys
eternal law and does so necessarily.
Science investigates eternal
law and tries to describe it.
Natural law is normative.
It prescribes what things should do and be
since the thing's nature determines its function
and thus its virtue, what it ought to do and be.
Eternal law determines natural law.
Natural law is the manifestation of eternal law
in creatures capable of rational
choice and activity.
OK. So eternal law is the law of nature.
Eternal law is the law of physics that
God establishes to govern the universe.
It's necessarily true-- The
laws of physics according
to Aquinas are necessarily true
everywhere in the universe.
Now, natural law, as opposed to a law of nature,
so natural law is just what they're calling
the moral law that humans can discern through--
by using reason and studying the eternal
law, which includes the laws of the physical
that govern the physical universe.
And I think what-- if you're going to combine
this with Plato, it's interesting to note
in the cave allegory, it is
introduced with the divided line idea.
So, Socrates says, imagine there's two worlds,
the intellectual world of eternal absolute forms
or ideas, and then this material world.
Now divide-- So there's a line
divided in two unequal portions,
the upper portion being larger, and
the bottom portion being smaller.
Now divide each of those
segments in the same proportion.
So you have four segments.
So the two bottom segments
are the material world.
At the bottom level are shadows and mirror
reflections of three-dimensional objects
at the top level of the material world.
So this physical body here, or this
pen, anything, that's at the top level
of the material world, actual physical objects.
At the bottom level are the shadows they cast
or the reflections that they cast in a mirror.
And then the two levels of the intellectual
world at the bottom are the mathematical forms
that describe the three-dimensional
physical objects that we perceive.
So the three-dimensional objects we
perceive are actually always changing.
They're never the same from
one moment to the next.
But the mathematical forms that describe
the ever-changing physical forms are eternal
and fixed.
That's why they belong to the
eternal world of the intellect.
That's the laws of physics that when we study
the laws of physics, like general relativity,
quantum mechanics, and some people say string
theory, which combines those two previous forms
of the laws of nature, that we then have-- that
level of the intellectual world is like a shadow
or a mirror reflection of the higher level,
where we find things like absolute justice.
So that is the realm of the
normative, the moral laws.
So you can-- Just like you can study an
object by looking at its mirror reflection,
you can study the moral laws by
looking at its mirror reflection,
which are the laws of physics,
the laws of nature.
So, to develop a natural law theory, if
you combine these two, it starts to--
there's just a more comprehensive theory.
Another part of combining these
two would be reincarnation,
something that Aquinas did not believe in.
But we saw in the Phaedrus that you see
those absolute ideas at the highest level
of the intellectual world, at the
outermost sphere of the universe,
where you can go after death
and before your next birth.
And then you perceive them.
They're imprinted on your soul.
We'll see St. Thomas Aquinas
saying that God's light,
the light of God's countenance imprinted the
forms of reason on our soul and that is--
that mixes well with Plato's
idea of the absolute ideas
out at the outermost horizon,
where God perceives those ideas.
And that's what makes God who God is.
And also, the light of God's countenance is--
there's a strong parallel with the
idea of the good in the cave allegory.
You get out of the cave, you see the
sun, when you get out of this material,
three-dimensional world, you see the idea
of the good with the eye of the soul.
It's the light of reason and truth, which get in
the shadow of which is the sun and it's like--
for making objects visible to the eye.
Things become visible to the eye of the soul
through the light of the idea of the good.
OK. So I'll read that again in page 124.
So Aquinas distinguishes
several different kinds of law.
Eternal law is the law of nature established
by God that governs the entire universe.
Everything in the universe obeys
eternal law and does so necessarily.
Science investigates eternal
law and tries to describe it.
Natural law is normative.
It prescribes what things should do and be.
Since the thing's nature determines its function
and thus its virtue, what it ought to do and be,
eternal law determines natural law.
Natural law is the manifestation of eternal law
in creatures capable of rational
choice and activity.
So now-- So we've gone over that.
Now the next paragraph, natural
law manifests the eternal law
by way of the light of natural reason.
So that's a quote from Aquinas.
God imprints on us the natural
ability to tell right from wrong.
Aquinas also distinguishes
natural law from human law.
Natural is fully general and
universal, but human law must apply
to particular circumstances in specific ways.
Natural law consists of first principles,
the starting points for practical reasoning
because natural law serves as a set of axioms
of the moral law, it must be self-evident.
It must be general and obvious.
Precepts of natural law are true
universally and necessarily.
OK. So natural law, although humans must use
reason to discern it by studying the eternal law
or the law of nature, the law--
which includes the laws of physics,
it doesn't mean reason makes it up.
It just discovers what's inherent
already in the eternal law.
So, it isn't arbitrary.
But when you apply what natural law discerns
from the eternal law to the everyday life
of human beings, then those laws are
adjusted to particular circumstances.
They're relative to the situation at hand.
So natural law is self-evident first principles.
So, in the United States of America, we
hold these truths to be self-evident,
you know, that everyone is created equal.
So, what makes that self-evident?
That's up to debate.
But Aquinas will say there are
a couple of self-evident things,
including that all actions are
aimed at the good, something good.
People act for a reason.
The reason is-- The ultimate
reason is they want something good.
Any animal that acts is trying
to achieve something good.
So-- And I'll get into that when we go
through the actual Summa Theologica.
But I'm going to continue to go
through these introductory notes.
So, again, natural law manifests the eternal
law by way of the light of natural reason.
God imprints on us the natural
ability to tell right from wrong.
Aquinas also distinguishes
natural law from human law.
Natural law is fully general and universal.
But human law must apply to particular
circumstances and specific ways.
OK. So, natural law is the universal truths that
are supposedly self-evident to human reason.
So, it might seem that natural
law, as Aquinas outlines it,
has little content, pursue good, avoid evil.
Everyone can agree to that.
But what is good?
What is evil?
Aquinas appeals to human nature.
What we are determines what
we ought to do and be.
So what is human nature?
We all have, he'll say, certain instinctive
knowledge of what is good and evil.
And one of the things we know is good is being.
You want to continue to exist.
And we also have in common with the animals,
certain things that are good
such as procreation.
And then unique to human beings, we have reason.
And that one of the things that's good for
humans to use their reason for is to know God.
So we'll get into all those details.
So, I'll just finish off here on page 125.
Our own dispositions thus provide a test.
We are naturally disposed to
pursue good and avoid evil.
The natural law is in us in the
form of the light of natural reason.
OK. So now, I will read from St.
Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologica.
I'm going to not get caught up in the four
factors which determine whether an act is good
or bad, its genus, its species, its
circumstance, and its end because it's going
to get really bogged down
in some-- in enough detail.
But it's the end of an action
is an important thing.
What's your-- What's the purpose of your action?
Do the ends justify the means?
If you have a good goal in mind, does that
justify doing some evil things to get it done?
Aquinas has a lot of rules about
that, which I'm not going to get into.
I'm just going to get into the
basics of what he thinks reason is
and what these absolute ideas are, how
they relate to his idea of natural law.
And then we're going to compare it to Plato's.
So, if you look on page 126,
so you'll see what he does.
He writes them, Article 5, whether a human
action is good or evil in its species,
and then we'll have objection 1,
objection 2, objection 3, objection 4.
And then he'll respond to each objection.
So I'm not going to go through every objection.
I'm just going to go through some of his
responses to get a basic framework of his idea
of natural law, which again is the moral
law that humans can discern using reason
by analyzing the laws of nature,
the eternal laws that God uses
to organize the universe, which science studies.
From that, you can derive a moral law.
So, on 126, the bottom of the right-hand column,
now human actions good and evil are predicated
in reference to the reason
because as Dionysius says,
the good of man is to be in accord with reason.
And evil is to be against reason.
For that is good for a thing which suits
it in regard to its form, and evil,
that which is against the order of its form.
So it's good to act according to the purpose
or the goal for which your form strives.
You're-- If you're a acorn, you're
striving to achieve the form of oak tree.
If you're a human being, you're striving to
achieve the form of a rational human being,
who discerns the moral code or the natural
law from the laws of the physical universe.
All right, I'm going to now
skip over to page 129.
So whether there is in us a
natural law, that's the question.
And there's three objections,
which I might go back to.
But let me just start-- Some people
say no, there is no natural law in us.
There's only a law of nature
is the first objection.
God made a law of nature to govern the universe.
That's all there is.
So there's not another subset
of laws created within us.
Aquinas will say, I agree, there's not.
We just have reason.
And reason automatically can discern
the natural law from the law of nature,
the moral law from physical
law that governs the universe.
So on page 129, the right-hand column,
on the contrary, a gloss on Romans 2:14,
so he quotes from the Bible or
other doctrines of the church,
like St. Augustine and Dionysius, we saw.
So this is from the book of Romans.
When the Gentiles who have not the law do
by nature those things that are of the law,
comments as [inaudible] although they haven't
a written law, yet they have the natural law,
whereby each one knows and is conscious
of what is good and what is evil.
So that's a quote from the Bible.
Why did the Gentiles follow the Jewish law?
Who-- They don't follow the Torah.
And then the answer is, although they have no
written law, yet they have the natural law,
whereby each one knows and is conscious
of what is good and what is evil.
So God is inscribing natural
law on every human being.
And what he'll go on to explain is it isn't
that God actually wrote down the moral laws
like the 10 commandments on your soul, but
God gives you reason, and that the reason
if it just observes through science the laws
of nature, it will discover the moral laws,
which are just-- which are eternal and
fixed, and they're waiting to be seen.
The first principles of morality,
that you then--
the self-evident truths of moral law is
what you have to uncover using reason
by studying the laws of the
universe, the physical laws,
which he calls the laws of nature.
So I answered that.
As stated above, law being a rule and
measure can be in a person in two ways,
in one way as in whom that rules
and measures and another way as in
that which is ruled and measured.
So, there is a natural law in
humans, in one sense, that we are--
all of us are imprinted by God the lawmaker.
And also, we can use reason to discern law.
So I'll just read what he says there.
Wherefore, since all things subject to
divine providence are ruled and measured
by the eternal law, as we stated above, it
is evident that all things partake somewhat
of the eternal law, insofar as namely
from its being imprinted on them,
they derive their respective
inclinations to their proper acts and ends.
So, divine providence has
imprinted eternal law on all things
by giving them their respective inclinations
and the proper acts towards their end.
So God imprinted eternal law on a squirrel
by giving the squirrel the instincts
to drive it towards its natural purpose, one of
which is gathering acorns and burying them all
over the place and building a nest.
You know, they don't have just to burden us.
They have a whole encompassing little house.
That is-- The ability to do that
is imprinted on them by God.
So now among all others, the rational
creature is subject to divine providence
in the most excellent way insofar as
it partakes of his share of providence,
by being provident both for
itself and for others.
So providence is the care of God
but it's also foresight, taking--
looking out for circumstances
being providential.
So, humans can look into the future
and discern what is going to unfold.
By studying the way things
have unfolded in the past,
we can get a glimpse of the laws of nature.
So, wherefore, it as a share
of the eternal reason,
whereby it has a natural
inclination to its proper act and end.
This participation of eternal law in the
rational creature is called the natural law.
So, I'll read that again, the whole thing.
Now among all others, the rational
creature subject to divine providence
in the most excellent way insofar as
it partakes of a share of providence
by being provident both for
itself and for others.
Humans have foresight.
Wherefore it has a share of the eternal reason,
whereby it has a natural
inclination to its proper act and end.
And this participation of the eternal law in
the rational creature is called the natural law.
So we have a natural inclination to
use reason to study the eternal reason
of which we are a part and parcel.
And when we do that, when we study the eternal
reason by studying the laws of the lawmaker,
the laws of physics, the laws of nature, I
don't know if he would include in that the laws
of psychology, or would those be considered
the natural law that reason uncovers.
But at any rate, when humans use
reason to study the eternal laws
that govern the universe,
that's our natural inclination.
That's what makes us a human being.
We have things in common with
animals and plants as well.
But to be fully human, we use
our reason to discover the ideas
of God's mind ultimately,
is what he's going to say.
So continuing here, hence the Psalmist, after
saying in Psalm 4:6, offer up the sacrifice
of justice as though someone asked what
the works of justice are, adds, many say,
who show us-- who showeth us good things?
An answer to which question, he says, the light
of thy countenance, oh Lord, is signed upon us.
Thus implying that the light of natural
reason, whereby we discern what is good
and what is evil, which is the
function of the natural law,
is nothing else than an imprint
on us of the divine light.
So, the Psalmist was saying,
some people say, you know,
how do you know what is good, what is just?
And then the answer is, the light
of thy countenance signed upon us.
So God's light imprints it upon you.
And he uses the word imprint,
imprint on us of the divine light.
It's therefore evident that
the natural law is nothing else
than the rational creature's
participation of the eternal law.
So, knowledge of what is good is
imprinted on us by the light of God.
And the light of God is reason.
Reason is like sight to the
eyes, so is reason to the soul.
We can see the absolute forms of knowledge.
We can discern the laws of nature using reason.
And from that, we can extrapolate what a-- what
is moral, what is ethical for a human being
to do, what is good, and what is evil.
What is good is what's-- which is a-- which--
good is following reason to achieve
the end for which a thing is formed.
And evil is going against which what reason
tells you that thing is formed to do.
And humans are formed to do certain things.
And he says not to do other things.
So, OK. So now, over on page 130, the question
is whether the natural law contains several
precepts or only one.
And they'll say it contains one
which is do good and avoid evil.
But from that, you can discern all of the
other, you know, laws, and not the natural law.
So again, law of nature is what
God creates and it has to do
with the physical workings of the universe.
Natural law is the moral code humans can discern
using reason by analyzing the physical laws
of nature, the eternal laws that
God used to create the universe.
And this is, by the way, you know,
400 years before Isaac Newton discovered
his version of the law of gravity.
But it's-- So his-- he didn't have that in mind.
But he had knowledge of science
and what science is trying to do,
he didn't emphasize mathematics,
which Plato will do.
And that's how you kind of make this a
more comprehensive natural law theory.
All right.
So, I answered that.
So, is there only one precept in
natural law or are there many?
He has answered that as stated above,
the precepts of the natural law are
to the practical reason what the
first principles of demonstrations are
to the speculative reason, because
both are self-evident principles.
Nothing is said to be self-evident in two ways,
first, in itself, secondly, in relation to us.
Any proposition is said to
be self-evident in itself
if its predicate is contained
in the notion of the subject.
All right, so what does that mean, the predicate
is contained in the notion of a subject?
When I teach about Kant, I'll use the example
that I've seen other people
teaching about Kant used.
The bachelor-- A bachelor is an unmarried male.
A bachelor is the subject, is an
unmarried male is the predicate.
Is the notion of the subject
contained in the predicate?
Is a bachelor an unmarried male?
Yeah, that's just the definition of a bachelor.
You don't need to go out
and ever meet a bachelor
if you know the definition
of what a bachelor is.
It's an unmarried male.
So that's a self-evident proposition.
It's just true by definition.
You know, to say, all bachelors are messy
isn't necessarily true, because there's nothing
in the definition of a bachelor
that says they have to be messy.
It just so happens a lot of bachelors are messy,
but it's not true self-evidently using
Aquinas' use of the term self-evident.
So, first principles are self-evident.
If the predicate is contained
in the notion of the subject,
but he's saying some self-evident truths are
too complicated for lesser minds to understand.
So to them, it's not self-evident.
But some propositions are self-evident only
to the wise, who understand the meaning
of the terms of such propositions, thus to one
who understands that an angel is not a body,
it is self-evident that an angel is
not circumscriptively in a place.
But this is not evident to the
unlearned for they cannot grasp it.
So that's-- these Catholic theologians
would talk about all these logical problems
with theology and one of the questions that used
to exercise their minds was how many
angels can fit on the point of a pin?
And the answer is an infinite number
because angels don't have extension in space
so they're not limited by spatial limitations.
So that's, I think, what
he was referring to there.
But that's hard for people to know understand.
How could something exist if
it's not extended in space?
So, all right, so some self-evident
truths, although they're self-evident,
you have to be educated to
see that they're self-evident.
Just continuing here, page 130, now a
certain order is to be found in those things
that are apprehended universally for that
which before all else falls
under apprehension is being.
The notion of which is included in all
things whatsoever a man apprehends,
wherefore the first indemonstrable principle
is that the same thing cannot be affirmed
and denied at the same time, which is
based on the notion of being and not being.
And on this principle, all others are based,
as is stated in metaphysics Section
4 Text 9, that's from Aristotle.
Now as being is the first thing that
falls under the apprehension simply,
so good is the first thing that
falls under the apprehension
of the practical reason,
which is directed to action.
So I'm going to go through this piece
by piece, since every agent acts
for an end under the aspect of good.
All right.
So, for that which before all else
falls under apprehension is being.
So the first thing, the first concept that
you're aware of, when you have any awareness
of all, he'll say, is the awareness of being.
We went over this with St. Augustine when
he was saying that each of us contains,
in our rational thought,
an image of the Trinity.
So the Trinity is God the Father,
God the Son, God the Holy Spirit.
And the God the Father is known through the
simple fact that you know that you exist.
I am. So God says in the Bible, I am who I am.
So just being itself, that's the
first principle of understanding.
And from that, things exist, you can understand
that the same thing can't be, you know,
one thing and another at the same time.
So that's a principle of logic.
So being, we know of, just it's--
you're just speculating about existence,
what exists, being, beingness exists.
All right, so-- but if you start
to think about what should I do,
then the first principle is good.
Because what I should do means an action
which is always aimed at an end or a purpose
and what all purposes have in common is, it
appears good to you, you're doing something
to achieve something that you think is good.
So with that in mind, I'll read this again.
So, now a certain order is to be found in those
things that are apprehended universally for that
which being all else falls
under apprehension is being.
The notion of which is included in all
things whatsoever a man apprehends.
You always see things in the frame of being.
Wherefore, the first indemonstrable principle is
that the same thing cannot be
affirmed and denied at the same time.
Indemonstrable principle is his
way of saying self-evident truth.
How can you prove that the same thing cannot
be affirmed and denied at the same time?
And you'll say, I can't prove it, I
just appeal to the fact that the concept
that we all universally hold is being.
We know what being is.
A thing is, or it isn't.
So a thing can't be and not be at the
same time, and so you can't tell me that.
So where-- where is this, that the same thing
cannot be affirmed and denied at the same time.
So that's the first law of logic.
You said, which is based on the
notion of being and not being.
All right, so, there you have it.
That's the first principle of
just apprehension in general.
Well, what about the first principle of
practical action, which is the realm of ethics?
Now, as being is the first thing that
falls under the apprehension simply,
so "good" in quotation marks is the
first thing falls under the apprehension
of the practical reason, so putting it
into practice, which is directed to action,
since every agent acts for an
end under the aspect of good.
Consequently, the first principle of practical
reason is one founded on the notion of good,
that good is that which all things seek after.
That's the first principle of ethics.
Good is that which all things seek after.
Hence, this is the first precept
of law that good is to be done
and pursued and evil is to be avoided.
All other precepts of the
natural law are based upon this,
so that whatever the practical reason naturally
apprehends as man's good or evil belongs
to the precepts of the natural law
as something to be done or avoided.
OK. So, the first self-evident truth
that we all know is being, things exist.
We know what being is and therefore we know
the difference between being and not being.
And therefore, you can't say one thing is
this way and another way at the same time.
So that's the first practical-- the
first principle of practical reason is
that all objects-- good is that
which all things seek after,
so that you should do good and avoid evil.
And then using reason, you can discern a
lot of other precepts of the natural law.
So continuing here, he says, since however good
has the nature of an end and evil the nature
of the contrary, hence it
is that all those things
to which man has a natural inclination are
naturally apprehended by reason as being good
and consequently as objects of
pursuit, and their contraries
as evil and objects of avoidance.
Wherefore, according to the order
of natural inclinations is the order
of the precepts of the natural law.
All right.
So, here's the natural law now.
What's the first natural law
about your ethical conduct?
Because in man there is first of all
an inclination to good in accordance
with the nature, which he has
in common with all substances.
And what does he have in
common with all substances?
They all exist.
They all have being, as we saw, that was
the first thing you know simply by knowing.
Being, that's the first concept
according to Thomas Aquinas.
All right, so, first of all, an inclination
to do good in accordance with the nature
which he has in common with all substances in as
much as every substance seeks the preservation
of its own being according to its nature.
And by reason of this inclination,
whatever is a means of preserving human life
and of warding off its obstacles
belongs to the natural law.
So, that would be the first
natural law, the first moral law
that humans can discern using reason
and studying the laws of nature.
All other-- All living beings
want to continue to live.
Even a worm will struggle to
get away and save his life.
Bugs are terrified.
If you touch them, they know
that their life is endangered.
Everything wants to continue
to preserve its life.
So, the first ethical law
is preserve human life.
Thou shalt not kill, I guess,
is what he's saying here.
So secondly, there is in man an inclination
to things that pertain to him more specially,
according to that nature which he
has in common with other animals.
OK. So, the other animals, I'll just continue
to read here, that which nature has taught
to all animals, he's quoting somebody
whose abbreviated name is there,
such as sexual intercourse,
education of offspring, and so forth.
So those are good things for humans.
It's natural that humans
have sexual intercourse.
Our bodies are clearly created for that.
So Aquinas would say, the male and the
female generative organs, they fit together.
That's a natural form.
It has a function of procreation.
Then you have children and all
the species educate their young--
well, probably not all, certainly
not all, but a lot do.
So humans should educate their young.
That's another ethical-- it would be
immoral not to educate your offspring.
Why? Because that's the natural function of a
human, like it is the natural function of other.
And he also-- And the Catholic
Church bases its sexual morality
on St. Thomas Aquinas' his theory here.
So sexual intercourse that's not for
procreation is immoral according to the church,
because it's not fulfilling
the function of procreation.
So you can say, well, that's
one of the functions for sex.
There's other functions as well.
How can you tell which has
priority over the other?
But at any rate, to get an
idea of the logic behind it,
that's-- this is where it's coming from.
So continuing, thirdly, there is in man an
inclination to good according to the nature
of his reason, which nature is proper to him,
meaning it distinguishes
us as the human species.
Thus, man has a natural inclination to know
the truth about God, and to live in society.
And in this respect, whatever pertains to
this inclination belongs to the natural law,
for instance, to shun ignorance, to avoid
offending others among whom one has to live,
and other such things regarding
the above inclination.
So he says in reply to that, there's only
one natural law, he says, all these precepts
of the law of nature have the
character of one natural law in as much
as they all flow from one first precept.
The first precept is good is to
be done, evil is to be avoided.
From that first precept of-- your reason
can discern that is a self-evident truth.
All actions are aimed at
achieving something good.
So, that's the way God created it.
Therefore, to seek the good is moral,
and to not seek the good is evil.
What is it?
What is good for the human being?
What function does the human have to
fulfill in order to be a good human?
We have to use our reason to discern God's
ideas, that he created the natural law
that governs the universe from which we can
discern the moral law or that-- so the-- it's--
God creates the laws of nature and then
we discern the natural law using reason
by studying the laws of nature.
It's just semantics.
It's how it's been translated.
So natural law in this text
means the moral code.
So, all right, so we've gone
over St. Thomas Aquinas.
And now let's combine that with Plato's
the Phaedrus and the cave allegory.
So, this-- the light of God's countenance.
Let me just briefly review some of the key
phrases that we're going to be comparing here.
When somebody said-- you know, the question
was, who knows what is good or what is just?
And the answer was, the light of thy
countenance, oh Lord, is signed upon us.
This is from Psalms 4:6,
thus, implying that the light
of natural reason whereby we discern what is
good and what is evil, which is the function
of the natural law, is nothing else than
an imprint on us of the divine light.
The divine light is human reason.
Human reason, enables us
to discern what is good.
So, in the cave allegory, the divine
light is the idea of the good,
the shadow of which is the visible sun.
The idea of the good contains all of the other
absolute ideas, the absolute idea of justice,
of beauty, and courage, as well as the idea
of tree and table and every other thing
that you could perceive in the three-dimensional
everyday world of the physical,
temporal world that's always changing.
So that idea of the good
contains all the absolute ideas
and it also shines the light
that enables us to see them.
And that-- And Augustine very simply took
Plato's idea of the good and called it God.
And you can apply that same
procedure to St. Thomas Aquinas here.
All right.
So the light of the countenance is
signed upon us, and that's similar
to what Plato said in the cave allegory.
And then the idea of the good here, so he
says on page 130, the right-hand column,
the bottom paragraph, it was
like complicated paragraph
that it contains two important
words, being and good.
For Plato in the cave allegory, the
idea of the good is the source of being.
It's beyond being because it's
the source of being itself.
It's the utmost category of existence
that gives being to everything else.
And so, when you perceive that idea of the good,
then and then only will you know
what is good for everything to do.
You have to perceive that idea
of the good in order to be just.
And so you can combine that
with St. Thomas Aquinas.
Well, OK, how does the light of
human reason discern what is good?
Well, then you combine that with the Phaedrus
and you have to realize that the idea
of the good is the outermost sphere
of the universe in as much as the idea
of the good contains all of
the other absolute ideas.
And all of the other absolute ideas are
contained out there at this outermost heaven
above the visible heavens where
the soul goes after death.
And those are the ideas that
God perceives all the time.
That's what makes God who God is.
So now-- So with that in mind, I'll now
go to-- First, I'll go to the Phaedrus.
So this is page 257.
And on the right-hand column,
he's talking about the demigods.
When the soul, which he compares
to a chariot, he goes well--
for now, let's just call it a composite being.
You've got a chariot driver and two horses.
One is noble and one is ignoble.
The ignoble one is physical desire.
The noble one is the chivalrous passion that
obeys the reason, which is the chariot driver.
And so the chariot driver has to control these.
One, you know, ignoble horse
is always pulling downward
and the noble horse is willing to go up.
They want to go up because that's where they
can feed the horses on the pasturage of truth,
where it will nourish their
wings and enable them to fly.
But if you've been habituated during life
to engage in bodily pleasures all the time,
then that ignoble horse just
keeps pulling down, down,
down and you never get all the way
back out to see these absolute forms.
So, page 257, right-hand column, but
when they go to banquet and festival,
this is the demigods, then they move up the
steep to the top of the vault of heaven.
The chariots of the gods in even poise
obeying the rein and gliding rapidly,
the other ones are filled with conflict.
For the immortals, when they
are at the end of their course,
go forth and stand upon the outside of heaven,
the revolution of the spheres carries them
around, and they behold the things beyond.
So there abides the very being with which true
knowledge is concerned, the colorless, formless,
intangible essence visible only to
the mind, the pilot of the soul.
So that's the essence of
all of the absolute ideas.
He said, absolute knowledge
in existence absolute,
that all the true existences are there.
And so, they-- he talks about souls
struggle to get there, some get a glimpse,
some never make it all the way, and they get
crippled and fall back to the earthly sphere.
So the-- So-- And then that
determines your next life on how much
of the truth you've seen, he says.
But the soul which has never seen the truth,
this is page 258, the right-hand column,
will not pass into the human form, for a man
must have intelligence of universals and be able
to proceed from the many particulars
of sense to one conception of reason.
All right.
So that's what Aquinas is saying too, you have
to use your reason to study the universal laws
of nature, which are the
ideas, these absolute ideas.
And again, if you remember the divided
line, the two sections of the eternal world
of absolute forms, the bottom section is the
mathematical forms, like the laws of physics.
You have to use reason to study the
many particular physical examples
from which you can discover the
eternal mathematical law of physics
that governs all of those particular things.
The universal truths of mathematical
physics, reason can discern.
And then those are just reflections
of the higher level
of absolute ideas, like the idea of justice.
So that would be what Aquinas calls natural law.
So, studying the laws of
physics is an important part
of discovering the moral
laws that humans should obey.
So continuing here, for a man must have
intelligence of universals and be able
to proceed from the many particulars
of sense to one conception of reason.
This is the recollection of those things which
are soul, one's soul while following God.
And therefore, the mind of the
philosopher alone has wings.
This is just for it is always according
to the measure of his abilities clinging
in recollection to those
things in which God abides.
In beholding them he is what he is.
And he who employs to write these
memories is ever being initiated
into perfect mysteries, and
alone becomes truly perfect.
But as he forgets earthly interests and is
wrapped in the divine, the vulgar demon mad
and rebuke him, they do not
see that he is aspired.
So that, we saw also in the cave allegory.
But you see there, God abides in this
outermost sphere of the universe.
And so in beholding them, he is what he is.
So when we go out in between incarnations
and physical forms and reacquaint ourselves
with these absolute ideas, so he doesn't
stress so much that these ideas are imprinted
on our souls here, as much as he says that
our souls go out to where they are imprinted
on the outermost sphere of the universe,
and then we can remember them using reason.
But he does imply that our soul is one
with that outermost sphere, in which case,
those absolute ideas would
be imprinted on our soul.
So if you look back on page 257, the left-hand
column, the bottom paragraph, Socrates says,
I'll endeavor to explain to you how the
mortal differs from the immortal creature.
The soul in her totality has the
care of inanimate being everywhere
and traverses the whole heaven,
appearing in diverse forms.
When perfect and fully winged, she
soars upward and orders the whole world.
So the soul in her totality
is the universal soul.
And we participate in that universal soul.
And our souls, they merge back with that
universal soul in between our reincarnations.
So it's not just that, oh, our souls are a
blank tablet, and then we go and remember,
although that could be kind of implied when
he's saying, you know, you go out there
and you see him when you're there.
But then what?
You forget them, yeah, you forget
them, but they're still there imprinted
on your soul, which is important for Aquinas.
So it is for Plato too.
Plato's called a rationalist because he says we
can use reason to discern the absolute ideas.
And that is what Aquinas is also saying.
But Aquinas isn't talking about reincarnation
and he's not specifically talking
about the outermost sphere.
Although he does elsewhere talk about that.
He does know about the importance of
the outermost sphere of the universe.
But it's not in our little
segment of the Summa Theologica.
OK. So, now we're going to
go to the cave allegory.
And so I've gone over the four
segments of the divided line.
And it's important to note the bottom
segment of the intellectual world,
the eternal world of eternal forms
is the laws of mathematical physics,
including geometry, just
the basic laws of geometry.
When you-- When you're thinking about a
Pythagorean Theorem of a right-angle triangle,
a 90-degree triangle, where one
of the angles is 90 degrees,
a squared plus b squared equals c squared.
You know, one of the legs squared plus
this squared equals the hypotenuse squared.
And you use visible triangles on a
piece of paper to help teach that,
so that the actual physical triangles
here, you could have a shadow of one
or an image-- a mirror reflection of one.
But the three-dimensional triangle that
you're studying to learn geometry is
like a shadow of the absolute idea.
And the Pythagorean Theorem would be that.
That's a lower level of an eternal form.
And then those are like shadows or
reflections of the next level up.
And that next level up is-- would include
the normative laws, like what is just.
So, that's just important for
Aquinas, because the natural law
which is human reason discerns the moral law,
he calls it natural law by studying the law
of nature, which is the universal
laws of physics.
We see that in Aquinas, and you can see
that in the divided line analogy for Plato.
And then after the cave allegory, he says, you
must educate the potential philosopher kings
in mathematics and geometry and music,
he'll say, and study the each dimension--
dimensionless numbers, two-dimensional
geometry, three-dimensional solid geometry,
then solid geometry in motion like
which is astronomy, the planets,
which is the study of the
fourth dimension of time.
And then you have to see
how they're all combined.
And music also studies time.
So, the study of physics and specifically
astronomy, the mathematical laws
that govern the movement of the planets, if
you can learn those, that's like a reflection
of the higher laws, which would
include the laws of morality
or what Aquinas is calling natural laws.
OK. So, I went through the cave allegory and
how we're like prisoners in a cave and we have
to get out of this to see that these
three-dimensional objects are reflections
of the absolute forms outside of the
cave, which we know from the Phaedrus are
in the outermost sphere of the universe.
And then-- So I'll just read about this.
So for Aquinas, the light of God's
countenance imprints upon us the truths
of the of the natural law.
So here's about the idea of the good
is the ultimate form to be seen.
And I'll just read that.
So he says, so, analyzing the cave
allegory, this entire allegory, I said,
you may now append, dear
Glaucon, to the previous argument,
the prison house is the world of sight.
So he's saying the cave is
what we are living in.
And the sun is-- The fire
in the cave is like the sun.
So, the prison houses the world of sight.
The light of the fire is the sun
and you won't misapprehend me
if you interpret the journey
upwards to be the ascent of the soul
into the intellectual world according
to my poor belief, which at your desire,
I have expressed whether
rightly or wrongly, God knows.
But whether true or false, my opinion
is that in the world of knowledge,
the idea of good appears last of
all, and is seen only with an effort.
When seen, it's also inferred to be the
universal author of all things beautiful
and right, parents of light and of the
Lord of light in this visible world,
and the immediate source of reason
and truth in the intellectual.
This is the power upon which he who
would act rationally in either public
or private life must have his eye fixed.
So, we saw Aquinas say the first self-evident
truth of practical reason, which is action,
practicing anything, is that
do good and avoid evil,
because all actions are aimed
at achieving some good.
You get up in the morning because if you didn't,
you wouldn't be able to get
to school or get to work.
You need to do that.
You know, you're guided to
achieve different goods.
That's the first thing that
practical reason realizes.
But according to Socrates, it's what the
idea of the good is, is the last thing,
only with an extreme effort that
you'll be able to understand.
And if you don't open up the eye of your soul,
which is your reason, to the idea of the good,
then you cannot act rationally
either in public or private life.
So when you're combining all of these elements
of St. Thomas Aquinas' natural law theory
with Plato's Phaedrus and the cave allegory,
you just want to keep these elements in mind.
That reason is the light of the idea
of the good, which Aquinas calls God.
And in the Phaedrus, Plato says, or
he had Socrates say that God is God
because God perceives these absolute
ideas, and that we have to perceive them.
The difference between Aquinas and Plato
is Plato talks about reincarnation,
so you'd want to include that, and that
we perceive these ideas after we die
if we've trained ourselves during life.
And also, this idea of studying the laws of
nature, the mathematical laws of physics,
using science, to help us discern
what is good for a human to do,
that we can know what the form of a human being
was created with a purpose in mind by God.
And we can use reason to discern what
the function of a human being is.
And the ultimate function of
human is to behave rationally.
To use our reason to understand
the truth of God, for example,
is the highest purpose for the human form.
And for Plato, the ultimate goal was to use
reason to discover the idea of the good.
So I've gone over these elements a few times.
It's enough.
If you choose to do this one, you know,
this is an introductory class, obviously,
I'm not expecting you to reinvent ethics
but just keep those basic elements in mind
so that I know you've thought about
them and then I will be satisfied
that you have been introduced to some
important ideas in world philosophy.
