Ethical situations on the subject of killing and the sacrifice of human lives are always subject to critical analysis and intensive argumentation. The so-called sacrifice of the few for the good of the many is usually founded upon Aquinasâ€™ Natural Law and Doctrine of Double Effect, both of which were logically formulated by the philosopher yet both also lend themselves to criticisms.
Aquinas defines the Natural Law based on the Eternal Law. He formulated the Eternal Law in his Summa Theologiae and defines it as â€œthe idea in Godâ€™s intellect by which He governs the worldâ€ (Magee, 1999). The Natural Law according to Aquinas is â€œhumansâ€™ participation in the Eternal Law through reason and willâ€ (Magee, 1999).
The Doctrine of Double Effect, on the other hand, is defined as a set of ethical criteria for evaluating whether one should do an act that would, in the process of producing a positive effect, also produce a negative effect (McIntyre, 2009). Our ethical proposition â€œIt is always wrong to kill innocent people, even if you could save many other lives by doing soâ€ is a rather weak proposition after it is analyzed with reference to Aquinasâ€™ two aforementioned doctrines.
With Reference to the Natural Law. There are various different levels of precepts that the Natural Law entails. The first of which is â€œGood is to be done and pursued and evil avoidedâ€ (Magee, 1999).
However, Aquinas has specified that a â€œgoodâ€ thing is something â€œthat we know immediately, by inclinationâ€¦that [would] count as good and thus to be pursuedâ€ (Murphy, 2008). Aquinas specifies these things as life, knowledge, procreation, society, and reasonable conduct.
First Precept. Applying the above precept to the given ethical situation, â€œIt is always wrong to kill innocent people, even if you could save many other lives by doing so,â€ one can see that the whole proposition logically satisfies the first part of the precept â€œGood is to be done and pursued.â€ Both the act of not killing innocent people and saving many other lives are believed to be inherently good, that is, good in itself. However, the proposition might not in a way satisfy the second part of the precept â€œ[that] evil [should be] avoided.â€
This is because the proposition implies a prohibition of killing innocent people, which, if done, would result in a possible non-fulfillment of the second part of the proposition: â€œYou could save many other lives by doing so.â€ If many other lives are not saved, then this means one has allowed the evil of death to take lives away, thus evil is not avoided, which is the second part of the precept. In short, our proposition fails the first precept of the Natural Law.
Second Precept. Another precept of the Natural Law is that it â€œcommands that we preserve ourselves in beingâ€ and one thing that can be deduced from this is that one is required to â€œtake care of [his life] and transmit that life to the next generationâ€ (Magee, 1999).
This may obviously refer to the goodness of procreation but it may not be necessarily the case because such a statement may translate to the preservation of the self for the benefit of the next generation. This precept on preservation may agree with the first part of the given ethical proposition: â€œit is always wrong to kill innocent people,â€ for the killing of people, whether innocent or not, opposes the idea of self-preservation. However, the second part of the proposition, â€œyou could save many other lives by doing so, or by killing innocent people,â€ does not agree with the precept on preservation.
The reason is that if you decide to preserve the lives of the innocent, then your action may result in the non-preservation of the lives of many others. This now serves as another proof of the weakness of the given proposition vis-Ã -vis the precept of the Natural Law on preservation.
With Reference to the Doctrine of Double Effect. The proposition, â€œIt is always wrong to kill innocent people, even if you could save many other lives by doing so,â€ lends itself to more criticisms on the weakness of its argument when criticized with reference to the Doctrine of Double Effect.
The doctrine consists of four conditions that must be met before one can declare an act morally permissible (McIntyre, 2009). And for this the proposition should be constructed into a conditional sentence: If one kills innocent people, it is wrong and hence presumed to be not morally permissible. Therefore the moral permissibility of the killing of innocent people will be evaluated vis-Ã -vis the four conditions of the Doctrine of Double Effect. Furthermore, the claim of the proposition that killing innocent people is morally wrong under all circumstances will be logically investigated.
First Condition. The first condition is the nature-of-the-act condition, which states that â€œthe action must be either morally good or indifferentâ€ (McIntyre, 2009). This may somehow oppose what we are intending to prove. It is indeed true that the killing of innocent people is not morally good nor is it morally indifferent.
Second Condition. The second condition is the means-end condition, which states that â€œthe bad effect must not be the means by which one achieves the good effectâ€ (McIntyre, 2009).
This is also a proof in favor of the proposition. If the goal is to avoid the death of many other lives, then it follows, according to the second condition, that death should not be meted out on innocent people just for the sake of the many others. Based on the second condition, death must not be utilized to avoid death. With the second condition, he proposition remains solid.
Third Condition. The third condition is the right-intention condition, which states that â€œthe intention must be the achieving of only the good effect, with the bad effect being only an unintended side effectâ€ (McIntyre, 2009). It is now here that the proposition weakens.
Based on the context of the proposition, the killing of innocent people, without any regard to the inherent morality or immorality of the act, has the intention of achieving only the good effect of saving many other peopleâ€™s lives, thus making the killing of the innocent a morally permissible act. The bad effect, which is the death of the innocent, is anyway simply a side effect.
Fourth Condition. The last condition is the proportionality condition, which states that â€œthe good effect must be at least equivalent in importance to the bad effectâ€ (McIntyre, 2009).
Although there will always be a question about the exactness of such an equivalence of importance, the majority may agree that, in the proposition, the saving of the lives of many far outweighs the killing of the lives of but a few innocent people. This therefore dismisses the killing of the innocent as a morally permissible act and such an argument counters the proposition.
We value our customers and so we ensure that what we do is 100% original..
With us you are guaranteed of quality work done by our qualified experts.Your information and everything that you do with us is kept completely confidential.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.Read more
The Product ordered is guaranteed to be original. Orders are checked by the most advanced anti-plagiarism software in the market to assure that the Product is 100% original. The Company has a zero tolerance policy for plagiarism.Read more
The Free Revision policy is a courtesy service that the Company provides to help ensure Customer’s total satisfaction with the completed Order. To receive free revision the Company requires that the Customer provide the request within fourteen (14) days from the first completion date and within a period of thirty (30) days for dissertations.Read more
The Company is committed to protect the privacy of the Customer and it will never resell or share any of Customer’s personal information, including credit card data, with any third party. All the online transactions are processed through the secure and reliable online payment systems.Read more
By placing an order with us, you agree to the service we provide. We will endear to do all that it takes to deliver a comprehensive paper as per your requirements. We also count on your cooperation to ensure that we deliver on this mandate.Read more