Gavin Colvert: Back to Nature: Aquinas and Ethical Naturalism
Friday, June 1, 2007
PDF There is no doubt that we are living in a moment of extraordinary development in the human capacity to decipher the rules and structures of matter, and in the consequent dominion of man over nature. We all see the great advantages of this progress and we see more and more clearly the threat of destruction of nature by what we do… The capacity to see the laws of material being makes us incapable of seeing the ethical message contained in being, a message that tradition calls lex naturalis, natural moral law. This word for many today is almost incomprehensible due to a concept of nature that is no longer metaphysical, but only empirical. [1]
In his recent addresses to groups of scientists and academics Pope Benedict XVI has been sounding a common theme: they ought to get back to nature.[2] His concern cuts deeper to the core of modern life than simply the question of whether human beings are using natural resources responsibly. As the Pope indicates, advances in empirical science and technology have enabled tremendous growth in our understanding of the structure of the physical world, including human biology. A paradoxical and unfortunate byproduct of these inherently worthy endeavors is that we have become less able to understand our own human nature, including its ethical implications, often referred to collectively as natural law ethics. As a consequence, we stand in danger of eliminating human nature.
Remarkably, other intellectuals, who share few of his presuppositions, agree with the Pope in this matter. Francis Fukuyama, for instance, has argued that advances in chemistry and biotechnology will enable us to alter our nature so fundamentally that we need to speak of a “post-human future” unless we find the ethical and political principles to establish prudent boundaries for technological innovation.[3] Our advances in scientific understanding, make it difficult for us to articulate these principles, because modern empirical methods challenge the traditional presuppositions of natural law ethics.
In addition to those who worry about the eclipse of human nature, there are also theorists who share the Pope’s sense that we must return to nature in moral and political philosophy. Proponents of the new “Darwinian natural right,” for instance, hold that evolutionary theory is compatible with traditional Aristotelian teleology when it is properly understood.[4] These arguments draw upon work by scientists who are prepared to admit the necessity of teleological explanations in biology.
Read the rest at http://lyceumphilosophy.com and post your comments here.
Subscribers can also submit discussion articles at the main site.
[1] Benedict XVI, Address to the Participants in the International Congress on Natural Law, Vatican City, February 12, 2007. See also, Benedict XVI, Meeting with the Representatives of Science, Lecture of the Holy Father, Regensburg, Germany, September 12, 2006,
[2] A portion of this paper was presented at St. Anselm College in November 2006. I wish to thank the College for the generous invitation to give this lecture.
[3] Francis Fukuyama, Our Posthuman Future : Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution, 1st ed. (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2002).
[4] See, for example, Larry Arnhart, Darwinian Natural Right : The Biological Ethics of Human Nature, Suny Series in Philosophy and Biology (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1998).