Moral absolutes in the New Natural Law Theory: the prohibition of directly damaging a basic human good
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14422/pen.v79.i304.y2023.022Keywords:
moral absolute, New Natural Law Theory, basic human good, consequentialism, human dignityAbstract
This paper seeks to show how the New Natural Law Theory bases the existence of absolute moral norms, and its importance to moral philosophy. The authors of this theory argue that natural law, through certain moral norms, leads to choose and protect basic human goods, corresponding to multiple aspects of human nature, avoiding its destruction, damage or impeding. Although most of this norms have exceptions according to the circumstances, those negative norms that forbid to choose an action that always directly violates a basic human good are exceptionless, because such actions cannot be compatible with self-fulfillment and attacks human dignity. The division of this work shall be as it follows: in the first four sections, I will make an approach to the key concepts that, for the New Natural Law Theory, explain the truth of exceptionless moral norms; in the fifth, I will show how these authors demonstrate moral absolutes and criticize consequentialism, and in the sixth, I will make a brief critical review of the arguments presented.
Downloads
References
Anscombe, G.E.M (1958). «Modern Moral Philosophy», en Philosophy 33, 124, pp. 1-19.
Anscombe, G.E.M (1981). The Collected Philosphical Papers of Elizabeth Anscombe, vol. III: Ethics, Religions and Politics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Aristóteles (1960). Ética Eudemia (Ethikón Eudemion), en Aristotelis Opera, W. de Gruyter et Socios. Berlín.
Aristóteles (1994). Ética a Nicómaco, traducción al español de María Araujo y Julián Marías. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Constitucionales.
Biggar, N. y Blanck, R, (eds.) (2000). The Revival of Natural Law. Philosophical, theological and ethical responses to the Finnis-Grisez School. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Company.
Finnis, J. (1991). Moral Absolutes, Tradition, Revision, and Truth. Washington DC: The Catholic University of America Press.
Finnis, J. (2011). Natural Law and Natural Rights. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
Finnis, J. (2011). Reason in Action. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
Finnis, J., Boyle, J., Grisez, G. (1987). Nuclear Deterrence, Morality and Realism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Frey, J. (2020). «Revisiting Modern Moral Philosophy», Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement, 87, pp. 61-83.
García-Huidobro, J., Miranda, A. (2013). «Finnis y Grisez ante el argumento de la facultad pervertida», en Etcheverry, J. B. (editor), Ley, moral y razón. Estudios sobre el pensamiento de John M. Finnis a propósito de la segunda edición de Ley natural y derechos naturales. México D. F.: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, pp. 177-188.
Grisez, G. (1964). Contraception and Natural Law. Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company.
Grisez, G. (1997). The Way of the Lord Jesus, vol. 1: Christian Moral Principles (1983), vol. 3: Difficult Moral Questions (1997). Chicago: Franciscan Press.
Grisez, G. (1965). «The First Principle of Practical Reason: A Commentary on the Summa Theologiae, I-II, question 94, article 2», Natural Law Forum 10, pp. 168-201
Grisez, G. (1978). «Catholic Faith and Intrinsically Evil Acts», en Proceedings of the First Convention on the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars, pp. 27-38.
Grisez, G. (1990). «Are There Exceptionless Moral Norms?» en The Pope John Center. Massachusetts: Braintree.
Grisez, G. (1991). Shaw, R., Fulfillment in Christ. Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.
Grisez, G. (1988). Beyond the New Morality. The Responsibilities of Freedom. Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.
Hardie, W. F. R. (1980). Aristotle’s Ethical Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Hittinger R. (1987). A Critique of the New Natural Law Theory. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Kaczor, C. (1997). «Exceptionless Norms in Aristotle? Thomas Aquinas and the Twentieth-Century Interpreters of the Nichomachean Ethics», The Thomist 61.1, pp. 33-62.
Lisska, A. (1996). Aquinas’ Theory of Natural Law. An Analitic Reconstruction. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
May, W. (2003). Moral Absolutes: Catholic Traditions, Current Trends and the Truth, 2.a ed. Milwaukee: Marquett University Press.
Miranda, A. (2013). «El sentido de la regla ciceroniana minima de malis eligenda y el problema del uso profláctico del condón», Teología y Vida 54, pp. 157-170.
Platón (2006). Critón, traducción A. Gómez-Lobo. Santiago: ed. Universitaria.
Porter, J. (2005). Nature as Reason. A Thomistic Theory of the Natural Law. Michigan: W. B. Eerderman Publishing Company.
Stein, W. (1961). Nuclear Weapons: A Catholic Response. Nueva York: Sheed & Ward.
Strauss, L. (1953). Natural Right and History. Chicago ad London: University of Chicago Press.
Tomás de Aquino (2002). Suma Teológica. Madrid: BAC.
Tomás de Aquino (1951). Suma Contra Gentiles III, traducción al español de M.M. Bergodá. Buenos Aires: ed. Club de Lectores.
Tomás de Aquino (1994). Cuestiones Disputadas Acerca de Lo Malo, traducción al español de H. Giannini y M. I. Flishfisch. Santiago: Editorial Universitaria.
Tomás de Aquino (2002). Comentario a las Sentencias de Pedro Lombardo II, edición preparada por J. Cruz. Pamplona: Eunsa.
Tomás de Aquino (2001). Comentario a la Ética a Nicómaco de Aristóteles, traducción al español de A. Mallea. Pamplona: Eunsa.
Weinreb, L. (1987). Natural Law and Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Westerman, P. (1998). The Disintegration of Natural Law Theory. Aquinas to Finnis. Nueva York: Brill.
Wright R. G. (1990). «Does Free Speech Jurisprudence Rest on a Mistake?: Implications of the Commensurability Debate», Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 23.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Pensamiento. Revista de Investigación e Información Filosófica
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The publishing Universidad Pontificia Comillas retain the copyright of articles published in Pensamiento. Reuse of content is allowed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivates 3.0 Unported. Authors are encouraged to publish their work on the Internet (for example, on institutional or personal pages, repositories, etc.) respecting the conditions of this license and quoting appropriately the original source.
