INTRODUCTION

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

Representatives, was intending to draft a bill which would amend the country’s Family Code,
Thereby allowing for 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 reason given in the news article vary, ranging from the opinions that seeing two men kiss
unsightly to the statement that there is something “irregular” about belonging to the lesbian, gay,
bisexual, transgender Community and to the judgement that two people of the same sex being
together is unnatural.

In this Chapter, We will explore how Thomas Aquinas provides the meaning of Natural and
Unnatural, Emphasizing the Capacity for reason as what is essential in our human nature.

THOMAS AQUINAS (1225-1274)

There have been various thinkers and systems of thought emerging throughout history that could
be said to present a natural law theory. Among them, the one we will be focusing on is the
medieval thinker Thomas Aquinas. It has to be recognized, however,that this natural law theory
is part of a larger discussion, which is his moral theory taken as a whole. This moral theory, in
turn, is part of a larger project, which is Aquinas's vision of the Christian faith. Before we turn to
natural law theory, let us first know the background of Thomas Aquinas.

Thomas Aquinas hailed as a doctor of the Roman Catholic Church. He is one of the figures who
have fundamentally shaped the way we understand the Christian faith. He was a Dominican friar
who has become the preeminent intellectual figure of the scholastic period of the Middle Ages,
arguably contributing to the doctrine of the faith more than any other figure of his time. The
SUMMA THEOLOGIAE, Aquinas's magnum opus,is a voluminous work that comprehensively
discusses many significant points in Christian Theology. He was canonized in 1323.

THE CONTEXT OF THE CHRISTIAN STORY

The fundamental truth maintained and elaborated by Aquinas in all his works is the promise right
at the center of the Christian faith: that we are created by God in order to ultimately return to
Him. The structure of his magnum opus Summa Theologiae follows the trajectory of this story.

There are three parts to this voluminous work. In the first part, Aquinas speaks of God, and
although we acknowledge that our limited human intellect cannot fully grasp Him, we
nevertheless are able to say something concerning His goodness, His might, and His creative
power. Recognizing then that we are created by God, we move on to the second part, which deals
with man or the dynamic of human life. This is characterized by our pursuit of happiness, which
we should realize rests ultimately not on any particular good thing that is created by God, but in
the highest good which is God Himself. Our Striving for this ultimate happiness, while
important, will not in itself bring us to this blessed state. In other words, salvation is only
possible through the presence of God's Grace and that grace has become perfectly incarnate in
the person of Jesus. Thus, the third part focuses on Jesus as our Savior. Given that our concern
here is the question of ethics, it would seem clear that what would be of greatest interest tous is
the second part or the section of this story that centers on human life and its striving toward God.
However, bringing up the notion that living a good life leads us to God could easily be
misunderstood as a simple exhortation to obey certain rules as given to us through Church
doctrines or by following certain passages lifted randomly from sacred Scriptures. In other
words, we may fall into the danger of the divine command theory, which we had explored in the
first chapter. Instead, we should hope to find that there is much greater complexity, but also
coherence, to the ethics of Aquinas.

THE CONTEXT OF AQUINAS'S ETHICS

A full consideration of Aquinas's ethics would require us to explore his discussion of other
matters, such as how, in our pursuit of happiness, we direct our actions toward specificends. We
might explore how emotions"the passions"-are involved in this process, and therefore require a
proper order if they are to properly contribute to a good life. We might explore how our actions
are related to certain dispositions (often referred to as "habits") in a dynamic way since our
actions both arise from our habits and at the same time reinforce them. We might explore his
discussion of how we develop either good or bad habits with good disposition leading us toward
making moral choices, thereby contributing to our moral virtue, and a bad disposition inclining
us toward making immoral choices, bringing us to vice. The Christian life, therefore, is about
developing the capacities given to us by Godinto a disposition of virtue inclined toward the good.

Aquinas also puts forward that there is within us a conscience that directs our moral thinking.
This does not refer to some simple intuition or gut feeling. For Aquinas, there is a sense of right
and wrong in us that we are obliged to obey. However, he also adds that this sense of right and
wrong must be informed, guided, and ultimately grounded in an objective basis for morality.
So, we called to heed the voice of conscience and enjoined to develop and maintain a life of
virtue. However, these both require content, so we need something more. We need a basis for our
conscience to be properly informed, and we need a clearer guidepost on whether certain
decisions we make lead us toward virtue or vice. Being told that one should heed one's
conscience or that one should try to be virtuous, does very little to guide people as to what
specifically should be done in a given situation. Thus, there is a need for a clearer basis of ethics,
a ground that will more concretely direct our sense of what's right and wrong. For Aquinas, this
would be the natural law.

We can recall how the ethical approach called the divine command theory urges a person toward
unthinking obedience to religious precepts. Given the problems of this simplistic approach to
ethics, we can contrast how the moral theory of Aquinas requires the judicious use of reason. In
doing so, one's sense of right and wrong would be grounded on something stable: human nature
itself.

We will start by exploring how Aquinas restates the Christian message, making use of a
philosophical vocabulary appropriated from the ancient Greeks. We then look at howAquinas
speaks of the essence and also the varieties of law. From there, we will be able to explore the
precepts of natural law.

The Greek Heritage

Neoplatonic Good

Neo-Platonism

● not used in ancient times

- the last school of Greek philosophy

- founded by Plotinus in the 3rd Century A.D

the ancient philosophers who are generally classified as Neo-Platonists called themselves simply
as "Platonists"
- did the philosophers of the Renaissance and the 17th century whose ideas derive from ancient
Neo-Platonism

- would have considered themselves simply Platonists

- their beliefs demonstrate significant differences from those of Plato

● a religious philosophy

- combining a form of idealistic Monism with elements of Polytheism.

teaches the existence of an ineffable and transcendent one

- emanates the rest of the universe as a sequence of lesser beings

Neo-Platonic philosophers

- added hundreds of intermediate

beings

● a gods

● a demons

● a angels

Plotinus - the founder of Neo-Platonism

- developed his theories initially in Alexandria in his native Egypt, and then later in Rome

- influenced by the teachings of classical

Greek philosophy

- Persian and Indian philosophy — a product of his extensive travels, and Egyptian theology

- original intention was merely to preserve the teachings of Plato and Socrates.

- effectively fused Platonism with oriental mysticism

Neo-platonic good
God creates. This does not only means that He brings about beings, but it also means that He
cares for, and thus governs, the activity of the universe and of every creature? This central belief
of the Christian faith, while inspired by divine revelation, has been shaped and defined by an
idea stated in the work of the ancient Greek philosopher Plato, which had been put forward a
thousand years before Aquinas. He is credited for giving the subsequent history of philosophy in
one of its most compelling and enduring ideas: the notion of a supreme and absolutely
transcendent good.

Plato’s idea of the good

The Idea of the Good

Except from The Republic'

Plato
Now, that which imparts truth to the known and the power of knowing to the knower is
what Iwould have you term the idea of good, and this you will deem to be the cause of science,
and of truth in so far as the latter becomes the subject of knowledge; beautiful too, as are both
truth and knowledge, you will be right in esteeming this other nature as more beautiful than
either; and, as ni the previous instance, light and sight may be truly said to be like the sun, and
yet not to be the sun, so in this other sphere, science and truth may be deemed to be like the
good, but not the good; the good has a place of honor yet higher.

You would say, would you not, that the sun is not only the author of visibility in all
visible things, but of generation and nourishment and growth, though he himself is not
generation? In like manner the good may be said to be not only the author of knowledge to all
things known, but of their being and essence, and yet the good is not essence, but far exceeds
essence in dignity and power.

Plotinus idea of the good and the one

The Good and the One

Excerpt from the Enneads

Plotinus

Still, do not, I urge you, look for The Good through any of these other things; if you do,
you will see not itself but its trace: you must form the idea of that which is to be grasped cleanly
standing to itself not in any combination, the unheld ni which al have hold; for no other si such,
yet one such there must be.
 Now it is clear that we cannot possess ourselves of the power of this principle in its
concentrated fullness: so to do one must be identical with it: but some partial attainment is within
our reach.

You who make the venture will throw forward all your being but you wil never tell ti
entire-for that, you must yourself be the divine Intellect in Act-and at your utmost success it wil
still pass from you or, rather, you from it. nI ordinary vision you may think to see the object
entire: ni this intellective act, al, less or more, that you can take to mind you may set down as
The Good.

It is The Good since, being a power, ti is the cause of the intelligent and intellective life
as of life and intellect; for these grow from it as from the source of essence and of existence, the
Source as being One, simplex and first because before it was nothing. All derives from this; it is
the origin of the primal movement which it does not possess and of the repose which is but its
absence of need; for neither rest nor movement can belong to that which has no place in which
either could occur; center, object, ground, all are alike unknown to it, for it is before all. Yet its
Being is not limited; what is there to set bounds to it? Nor, on the other hand, is it infinite in the
sense of magnitude; what place can there be to which it must extend, or why should there be
movement where there si no lacking? All its

infinitude resides in its power; it does not change and will not fail; and in it all that is unfailing
finds duration.

Aristotelian Being and Becoming

In order to understand beings, Aristotle discussed and proposes the four concepts which provide
a way of understanding any particular being under consideration. According to Aristotle every
being can be said to have four causes.

According to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, causality is at the heart of Aristotle’s

scientific and philosophical enterprise. Additionally, each Aristotelian science consists in the
causal investigation of a specific department of reality. If successful, such investigation results in
causal knowledge; that is, knowledge of the relevant or appropriate causes.

The said emphasis on the concept of cause explains why Aristotle developed a theory of
causality which is commonly known as the doctrine of the four causes. For Aristotle, a firm
grasp of what a cause is, and how many kinds of causes there are, is essential for a successful
investigation of the world around us.
We recognized that any being we can see around is corporeal, possessed of a certain materiality
or physical stuff. We can refer to this as the material cause. It is which is given in the reply to the
question, “what is it made out of?” “what is the phenomenon made of?”

Four Causes excerpt from the Physics Book II Chapter 3 of Aristotle, he states that “In one,
sense, then (1) that out of which a thing comes to be and which persist, is called cause, for the
example, bronze of the statue, the silver of the bowl”

As an example, let us evaluate the bronze of the statue as what have Aristotle has mentioned in
his excerpt in accordance with the doctrine of the four causes.

Under the material cause, for a bronze statue to come into being, it requires bronze as its material
cause. Likewise a silver bowl requires silver. Because for Aristotle, the material cause is to do
with the matter itself.

A being is individuated–it becomes the unique, individual being that it is – because it is made up
of this particular stuff. We also realize that this material takes on a particular shape: so a bird is
different from a cat, which is different from a man. The shape that makes a being a particular
kind can be called its form. Thus, each being also has a formal cause. It is which is given in
reply to the question “What is it?” “what form does the phenomenon take?”

Four Causes excerpt from the Physics Book II Chapter 3 of Aristotle, he states that “ In another
sense (2) the form or the archetype, that is, the statement of the essence..”

For the Formal Cause following the example of Aristotle’s example of the bronze statue, the
formal cause here would be what gives the statue its specific shape and appearance. Aristotle
believes that the formal cause is closely tied to essence and identity, describing it as the “form or
the archetype.i.e., the statement of the essence. ( Physics, fourth century BCE, [2017]). The
statue has the essence of a statue, rather than a mere lump of bronze, because it is formed in a
specific shape. A chair has the essence of a chair because the material it is composed of has been
given this specific form.

It is interesting to note that, here, that Aristotle’s view of forms contrasts with Plato’s. Plato’s
theory of forms holds that the forms of our material world are merely imperfect copies of
transcendent archetypes which lie outside of time and space. Plato's Theory of Forms asserts that
the physical realm is only a shadow, or image, of the true reality of the Realm of Forms. So what
are these Forms, according to Plato? The Forms are abstract, perfect, unchanging concepts or
ideals that transcend time and space; they exist in the Realm of Forms. Aristotle, on the other
hand, argues that the forms taken by phenomena are intrinsic to them – and very much of the
material world.

In other words: Although our body may change over time, Aristotle argues that these kinds of
accidental changes do not change our substantial form and essence. Even when our skin wrinkles
or our hair turns gray, we retain the form and essence of a human.

One can also realize that a being does not simply pop up from nothing, but comes from another
being which is prior to it. Parents beget a child. A mango tree used to be a seed that itself came
from an older tree. Thus, there is something which brings out the presence of another being. This
can be referred to as the efficient cause. It is which is given in reply to the question “Where does
change (or motion) come from? “How did the phenomenon happen?”

Four Causes excerpt from the Physics Book II Chapter 3 of Aristotle, he states that “Again (3)
the primary source of the change
or coming to rest; for example, a man who gave advice is a cause”

For the efficient cause , in our familiar case of the bronze statue, is the process by which its
material takes the form of a statue. Each step along the journey of change and each person who
contributes to it, would together constitute the bronze statue’s efficient cause. It is related to the
underlying movements which lead to any given phenomenon or event.

“Aristotle thinks of efficient causes as processes, rather than as static events,” and that “actual
particular causes are not prior in time to their effects, but are co-temporaneous with them”
(Shields, 2014).

Since a being has an apparent end or goal, a chair to be sat on, a pen for writing, a seed becoming
a tree, one can speak of the final cause of each being. It is given in the reply to the question:
“what is its good?” “ What is the phenomenon’s final purpose?”

Four Causes excerpt from the Physics Book II Chapter 3 of Aristotle, he states that “ Again (4) in
the sense of end or “that for the sake of which” a thing is done, for example, health is the cause
of walking about.

As for the final cause, as mentioned in the excerpt Aristotle describes the final cause as “that for
the sale of which a thing is done”. The final cause is the ultimate purpose or telos that a given
phenomenon has. As Christopher Shields explains, the final cause is a crucial component of
Aristotle’s overall causal model.
We can see that the bronze statue’s final cause is to have an effect on those who see it, – maybe
it is celebration a particular figure, or commemorating a particular tragedy that its creators want
us to remember. They are straightforward to trace for those objects which are created by humans
for a specific purpose.

But what about nature and the wider universe? Can the movement of living creatures, the sea, or
the planets in our solar system, really be said to have a final cause — a final purpose? Would this
not be a naive anthropomorphization of natural forces, which simply move according to the
interplay of biology, chemistry, and physics?

This, however, is exactly Aristotle’s argument. As John Vella explains, the final cause “reveals
Aristotle’s teleological conception of nature” (2008) — for Aristotle, everything in nature does
have a final purpose. Crucially, too, Aristotle “wants to argue that some entities have final causes
even though they were not given those causes by the activities of conscious designing agents”
(Shields, 2014). For Aristotle, purpose is not tied to intentionality; instead, it is something that is
naturally present in a phenomenon’s form.

This idea of the “supreme good” is an important one. For Aristotle, natural beings — including
us — are acting with the final cause of our own good in mind. It is the only thing that is desirable
for its own sake; the end goal to which all we do is oriented. Aristotle understands this supreme
good as eudaimonia, which can also be understood as a life of successful flourishing. This, then,
is where we come to what Aristotle’s four causes mean for humanity.

It is not a case of a being that is something which is already permanently set as it is and remains
forever unchanging. So in addition, Aristotle also has to explain to us the process of becoming or
the possibility of change that takes place in a being. A new principle is introduced by him, which
we can refer to as potency and act. A being may carry within itself certain potentials, but these
require being actualized. A Puppy is not yet a full-grown dog. These potencies are latent in the
puppy and are actualized as the puppy grows up and achieves what it is supposed to be. The
process of becoming–or change–can thus be explained this way. Understanding beings, how they
are and how they become or what they could be, is the significant Aristoteian contribution to the
picture which will be given to us by Aquinas.
Aristotle’s concepts of potency (or potentiality) and act (or actuality) are fundamental principles
in his philosophy, used to explain change, motion, and the nature of reality.

Potency (Potentiality)

● Definition: Potency refers to the capacity or possibility for change or development. It

represents what something can potentially become or do, but is not yet.
● Example: An acorn has the potency to become an oak tree. It has the potential to grow
and develop into a fully mature tree, given the right conditions.

Act (Actuality)

● Definition: Act refers to the fulfillment or realization of potential. It is the state of being
in which something has fully realized its potential.
● Example: The oak tree is the actuality of the acorn. When the acorn has grown and
developed into a tree, it has achieved its potential and is now in a state of actuality.

Relationship Between Potency and Act

● Dynamic Process: Aristotle used these concepts to describe the process of change and
development. Change occurs when something moves from potency to act. For instance,
when a seed grows into a plant, it transitions from its potential state (potency) to its actual
state (act).
● Causality and Motion: These principles are also used to explain causality and motion.
For something to change, there must be an underlying potential that can be actualized.
This framework helps to understand how and why things change in the natural world12.
Aristotle’s ideas on potency and act have had a lasting influence on various fields, including
metaphysics, ethics, and natural sciences, shaping the way we understand the nature of change
and existence.

Is there a specific aspect of this principle you’d like to delve deeper into?

Summary for Part 1

Certainly! Let’s explore the connections between the Christian story, Aquinas’s ethics,
Neoplatonic concepts of the good, and Aristotelian ideas related to being and becoming within
the context of natural law.

1. Christian Story and Natural Law Ethics:

○ In the Christian context, the story of creation and the Fall in Genesis provides the
foundation for understanding human nature and morality.
○ According to natural law ethics, reason is the source of moral law, directing us
toward the “Good.” This Good is discoverable within human nature itself.
○ Aquinas, a Christian theologian, developed Thomistic ethics based on natural law.
He believed that the moral law is an expression of God’s Eternal Law, which
guides us to “do good and avoid evil” 1.
○ Thus, the Christian narrative informs our understanding of human nature and the
moral principles inherent in it.
2. Aquinas’s Ethics and Natural Law:
○ Aquinas follows Aristotle in linking morality to our proper human end (telos).
This end is eudaimonia (happiness), understood as completion, perfection, or
well-being 2.
○ Natural law ethics emphasizes that actions are good or bad based on whether they
contribute to or deter us from this ultimate goal.
○ Aquinas identifies three natural inclinations guiding human actions: self-
preservation, just dealing with others, and the propagation of the human species 1.
○ These inclinations align with the Christian understanding of human dignity and
the value of life.
3. Neoplatonic Good and Natural Law:
○ Neoplatonism, influenced by Plato and Plotinus, emphasizes the existence of a
transcendent Good beyond the material world.
○ While natural law ethics focuses on the immanent Good discoverable within
human nature, Neoplatonism reminds us of the higher, divine Good.
○ The Neoplatonic concept of the Good can enrich our understanding of moral
principles and elevate our ethical aspirations.
4. Aristotelian Being and Becoming:
○ Aristotle’s philosophy emphasizes the teleological view of nature, where
everything has a purpose (final cause).
○ Aquinas incorporates Aristotelian ideas into his natural law theory. For Aristotle,
the Good involves fulfilling our potential and actualizing our capacities.
 ○ In the context of natural law, actions that align with our essential nature contribute
to the Good.
○ The process of becoming (actualization) connects with our moral journey, as we
strive to fulfill our telos through virtuous actions.

In summary, the Christian story, Aquinas’s ethics, Neoplatonic notions of the Good, and
Aristotelian concepts of being and becoming intersect within the framework of natural law. They
collectively shape our understanding of morality, human nature, and the pursuit of the Good. 🌟12

The Essence and Varieties of Law

ESSENCE

- As rational beings, we have free will. Our actions are directed toward attaining ends or goods
that we desire.
- Just because we think that a certain end is good and is therefore desirable does not necessarily
mean it is indeed good.
- Acts are rightly directed towards their ends by reason. But, this does not really mean that
through reason we can figure out how to pursue something that we already had thoughtlessly
supposed to be good for us; what is necessary is to think carefully of what really is in fact good
for us.
- Aquinas reminds us that this will not do; we cannot simply act in pursuit of our own ends or
good without any regard for other people's ends or goods. We are not isolated beings, but beings
who belong to a community. Since we belong to a community, we have to consider what is good
for the community as well as our own good. This can be called the common good.
- It is good for us to not simply be free to act in whatever way we like. We should recognize the
proper measure or the limits in our actions that would allow us to direct our acts in such a way
that we can pursue ends, both our own and also that of others, together. The determination of the
proper measure of our acts can be referred to as law.
- A law, therefore is concerned with the common good. In a way, making of a law belongs either
to the whole people or a to a public person who has care for the common good or is tasked with
the concern for the good of the community or of the whole person.
- It is also necessary for rules or laws to be communicated to the people involved in order to
enforce them and to better ensure compliance. This is referred to as promulgation.

- Aquinas' own summary of this point is worth citing: "The definition of law may be gathered;
and it is nothing else than an ordinance of reason for the common good, made by him who has
care of the community, and promulgated".
Dr. Gloria Frost discusses Aquinas's concept of the common good, emphasizing its distinction
from private goods and its relation to a shared life of virtue.

Highlights

- Aquinas contrasts common good and private good.

- Private goods diminish when shared among individuals.

- Common goods, like victory and peace, can be enjoyed by all without loss.

- The state's laws aim to secure a shared life of virtue.

- Community is essential for exercising virtues such as generosity and justice.

- Virtuous living leads to knowledge and love of God.

- Union with God is the ultimate common good for all.

Key Insights

- Distinction Between Goods: Aquinas clarifies that private goods serve individual interests,
whereas common goods benefit the whole community without diminishing. This underscores the
importance of societal well-being over individual possession.

- Nature of Common Goods: True common goods, like peace or team victories, enhance
collective happiness and do not decrease with shared enjoyment, promoting unity and
cooperation within communities.

- Role of the State: Aquinas believes that the state should focus on facilitating a shared life of
virtue, suggesting that laws should guide individuals towards moral living, highlighting the
interdependence of ethics and governance.

- Community and Virtue: Virtues cannot be fully realized in isolation; they require interaction
with others. Generosity and justice are social virtues that flourish when people engage with one
another, reinforcing the necessity of a community.

- Natural Law and Guidance: Aquinas posits that communities provide the wisdom and
experience needed to apply natural law in everyday situations, showcasing the role of shared
knowledge in moral decision-making.
- Ultimate Common Good: The highest aim of a virtuous life, according to Aquinas, is attaining
knowledge and love of God, indicating that spiritual fulfillment is the ultimate goal for all
individuals and communities.

- Universal Access to God: God, as the ultimate common good, can be known and loved by all
without being diminished, emphasizing the inclusive nature of divine love and the
interconnectedness of humanity.

VARIETIES

Thomas Aquinas- According to Aquinas there are four main kinds of law: the eternal, the
natural, the human, and the divine. The last three all depend on the first, but in different ways. If
we were to arrange them in a hierarchy, eternal would be at the top, then natural, then human.
Divine law is not in conflict with natural law, but it reaches human beings by a different route,
revelation.

Eternal Law
Aquinas believes that the eternal law “is simply the plan of divine wisdom that directs all the
actions and movements of created things.” He says that God is above all else. That he creates
everything in the universe. Human beings participate in eternal law in two ways: by action and
by cognition. “The virtuous are completely subjects to the eternal law, as they always act in
accord with.” Aquinas believes people who are truthful, acts according to the eternal law.

Eternal law was God’s perfect plan, not fully knowable to humans. It determined the way things
such as animals and planets behaved and how people should behave

Natural Law
According to Thomas Aquinas, Natural law is a fundamental aspect of his ethical theory.
Aquinas believed that Natural Law is part of the Eternal Law, which is God’s grand design for
the universe.
Human Law
Human law refers to all instances wherein human beings construct and enforce laws in their
communities. Given the larger picture of Aquinas view, one would have a basis for assessing the
validity or invalidity of a human law: this would be whether or not conforms to the natural law.

Divine Law
According to Thomas Aquinas, ‘Divine law’ is a type of law that is derived from eternal law
and revealed to humans through divine revelation, such as the scriptures. Aquinas divides divine
law into two main parts: the ‘Old Law’ and the ‘New Law’, which correspond to the Old and
New Testaments of the Bible⁵.
Divine law is essential because it provides guidance that natural and human laws alone cannot
offer. It directs humans towards their supernatural end, which is eternal happiness with God³. For
example, the Ten Commandments are part of divine law, making God's eternal law more
concrete and knowable⁴.

Natural Law

In Common With Other Beings

• Our presence in the rest of creation does not only mean that we interact with creatures that are
not human, but that there is also in our nature something that shares in the nture of other beings.

• Aquinas thus identifies first that there is in our nature, common with all other beings, a desire
to preserve one's own being. Aquinas tells us that it is according to the ntural law to preserve
human life.

• We can thus say that it would be a violation of the natural law, and therefore unethical to take
the life of another.

In Common With Other Animals

• Aquinas then goes on to say that there is in our human nature, common with other animals, a
desire that has to do with sexual intercourse and the care of one's offspring.

• The intrinsic connection between the sexual act and fecundity gives rise to a number of notions
of what is acceptable and unacceptable in varying degrees of contentiousness.

• From the stance of the natural law, the act of preventing the emergence of new life would be
considered unacceptable.

Uniquely Human

After the first two inclinations, Aquinas present a third reason which states that we have an
inclination to good according to the nature our season. This Natural Inclination is to know the
truth about God and to live in society. Aquinas does not go into details enumerating what
specific actions would be ethical or unethical. He only gave general guideposts: the epistemic
concern and the social concern.