3. Finnis and Natural Law Updated -1

He describes it as an account of 'very great merit'.

A ruler has the authority to act for the common good, but if they make stipulations against the common good or basic principles of practical reasonableness, those stipulations lack moral authority.

It addresses questions about the origins of cosmic order and human freedom and reason, which can be valued even by atheists.

An 'unjust law' is one that may be recognized as laid down by authorities but is considered unjust in a limited, systemic sense, indicating that the law posited by the political community can sometimes go astray.

It is the most authoritative modern statement of natural law, advocating a return to 'pure natural law' associated with Aristotle and Aquinas.

They guard against deviations from the standard of integral human fulfilment.

A rational or coherent plan of life.

No, Finnis asserts that there is no hierarchy among the seven basic goods; each is equal in importance and cannot be reduced to aspects of one another.

Finnis refers to knowledge for its own sake as knowledge that is pursued not merely instrumentally but for the intrinsic value it holds.

Basic goods are items or things that are essential for human beings, which are intrinsically worthy of being pursued and cannot be measured or compared.

Finnis sees human rights as a fundamental component of the common good, subject to limitations by each other and other aspects of the common good, unlike utilitarianism which prioritizes majority benefit.

Critics question whether the basic goods are truly self-evident, as Finnis provides no examples or reasons to support this claim.

There is no clear reason provided by Finnis as to why social ordering through law is the most appropriate way to organize political life.

It involves effectively using one's intelligence to choose actions and shape one's character, requiring both internal harmony and external authenticity.

It is defined as acting for the sake of one’s friend’s purposes and well-being, ranging from minimal peace to full friendship.

They identify motivations that could lead to actions contrary to achieving integral human fulfilment.

They provide a method of moral reasoning to arrive at moral choices among competing alternatives.

He argues that unjust laws are a subsidiary concern of natural law theory and cannot be reduced to a simple formula.

Aesthetic experience, which involves the appreciation of beauty and can be found in various forms of play and nature.

Finnis states that the focal meaning of law is an authoritative common ordering aimed at achieving the common good, while unjust laws are seen as imperfect instances or corruptions of law.

It structures the pursuit of goods generally and shapes our participation in other goods.

Finnis emphasizes the importance of studying law in conjunction with natural law, showing its significance in structuring human life according to practical reasonableness.

The focal meaning of law concentrates on what it achieves rather than on what it is.

It requires 'modes of responsibility' that guide how basic goods are realized.

They provide specific guidance to achieve integral human fulfilment, as the first moral principle is too general.

The criteria include need, function relative to roles and responsibilities, and capacity relative to roles in communal enterprise and opportunities for individual advancement.

Finnis lists seven basic goods that are components of human flourishing.

Law is needed to organize communal life and ensure the functioning of a communal enterprise.

Critics question whether Finnis has adequately considered man's capacity for evil in his formulation of the basic goods.

Finnis does not make God a premise of his theory; instead, he considers God as a conclusion that one might reach after accepting the arguments of his book. He believes a theory of natural law can stand without religious doctrine.

He defines it as the set of principles of practical reasonableness that order human life and human community.

Flourishing refers to growth, development, advancement, and fulfillment, which are results of pursuing basic goods.

Knowledge is significant because denying it as a good undermines the very basis of the argument, as the denial itself requires knowledge.

It guides individuals to choose, desire, and bring about outcomes essential to human fulfillment by pursuing the basic goods.

Finnis argues that legal positivism fails to appreciate law as an inherently purposive institution, which leads to a blindness regarding the value of positive law. He believes that understanding the purpose of law reveals its broader link to morality and justice.

Finnis identifies 9 basic requirements.

Finnis states that while the pursuit of basic values is supported by natural inclinations, some inclinations, like selfishness and cruelty, do not correspond to any basic value.

The basic drive that corresponds to the value of knowledge is curiosity, leading us to prefer true beliefs over false ones.

The third basic aspect of human well-being is play, which is engaging in performances enjoyed for their own sake.

The right not to have one’s life taken directly as a means to any further end, the right not to be positively lied to in expected factual communication, the right not to be condemned on knowingly false charges, the right not to be deprived of one’s pro-creative capacity, and the right to be taken into respectful consideration in assessments of the common good.

To explore the requirements of practical reasonableness in relation to the good of human beings living in community, addressing problems of justice, rights, authority, law, and obligation.

'Good is to be done and pursued, and evil is to be avoided.'

He does not provide a clear definition of what makes law 'Law' or what law is in an unambiguous manner.

In Finnis's view, 'life' includes bodily health, freedom from pain, and the transmission of life through procreation.

It refers to the good of all persons and communities, not individualistic self-fulfilment.

Finnis argues that private ownership supports personal autonomy in community and that resources are more productively exploited by private enterprise.

Finnis argues that although there are many varieties of good, they are all variations or combinations of one or more of the seven basic goods.

The first basic value is the value of life, which signifies every aspect of vitality that enables a human being for self-determination.

He suggests that it requires us to abandon our caricature version of what a natural law theory is.

He argues that natural law does not require a belief in morality in the sense of observing rational principles of behavior.

Basic goods are considered pre-moral because they come before what is deemed to be right and wrong.

It implies that an unjust law is not a true law and does not deserve moral respect.

Law is seen as an aspect of the basic goods, but also as an instrument that is logically prior to human flourishing.

Play is characterized as having its own value, being distinguishable from serious contexts, and can be solitary or social, intellectual or physical.

Positive law is seen as an instantiation of the common good and provides reason for action in conformity with its prescriptions. It is necessary but not sufficient for the flourishing of the community, which also requires the fulfillment of general principles of justice.

Basic goods are objective, self-evident values that every reasonable person must agree to as objects of human striving.

They are considered self-evidently good because they have intrinsic value and do not require proof to be accepted as good.

All human societies show a concern for the value of human life, generally accepting self-preservation as a proper motive for action and prohibiting killing without justification.

The common good requires a legal system to govern relations between persons in the community.

The First Moral Principle commands individuals to choose and will only those possibilities that are compatible with integral human fulfillment.