This theory is mostly associated with St Thomas Aquinas, who used Aristotle's philosophy and applied it to Christian thinking. Thomas Aquinas was born in 1225, Roccasecca, Sicily, Italy. He was a Dominican priest of the Catholic Church and immensely influential as a philosopher and theologian. He was a prominent exponent of natural theology and the father of Thomism. Aristotle said that good humans were those who fulfilled the purpose of human life. This applies to all things. For example: a good pencil is one that writes well or a good knife is one that cuts well. Aquinas then argued that since we cannot know what God wants us human beings to do with our lives, then what is the right thing to do? He states that we know what is right by considering the natural purposes and functions. Therefore, when making decisions we need to consider whether it is part of human nature to do so. For example if we apply natural law to abortion, we can argue that abortion should not be prohibited because it isn't natural so God didn't intend it. To be aborted is to have artificial chemicals injected into your body to kill your baby, but the chemicals aren't natural so they shouldn't be used. Another example is considering natural law for euthanasia. Having the thought to kill yourself is natural and so God intended for you to think like this. However, one may argue that this is immoral and the person should just die naturally. This opposing argument equally goes for abortion. It is natural to want to abort your baby and it is natural to want to create a chemical used in abortion, so must God have intended for humans to abort their babies?
Now if we consider natural law for whether there is ever a situation in which we can torture human beings, we can say that it is unnatural to torture people because it violates the natural right of the tortured individual and it defies the natural dignity of the victim. If the person is tortured then they are in pain and whatever they say, whether it is true or false, they have the right to do so in a natural situation. To be tortured is not natural and is morally unethically wrong. A person is not born to be tortured, but they are born to eat, drink, breathe. Those are all natural things compared to being tortured. Just as being tortured isn't natural, torturing someone isn't natural either. Aquinas would say that God didn't create us to torture or be tortured, therefore he would say that there is no way to justify torture, whether it is for good intentions or not, it is not natural so God didn't intend for us to do it.
To oppose this argument, we could say that it is natural to have the thought process of wanting to torture someone. Since we thought of the idea of torture in the first place, it must be natural and part of human nature to think of this in the first place. The problem with Aquinas' argument is that anything we choose to do could be considered natural as it must be natural to have thought to do so.
Now if we consider natural law for whether there is ever a situation in which we can torture human beings, we can say that it is unnatural to torture people because it violates the natural right of the tortured individual and it defies the natural dignity of the victim. If the person is tortured then they are in pain and whatever they say, whether it is true or false, they have the right to do so in a natural situation. To be tortured is not natural and is morally unethically wrong. A person is not born to be tortured, but they are born to eat, drink, breathe. Those are all natural things compared to being tortured. Just as being tortured isn't natural, torturing someone isn't natural either. Aquinas would say that God didn't create us to torture or be tortured, therefore he would say that there is no way to justify torture, whether it is for good intentions or not, it is not natural so God didn't intend for us to do it.
To oppose this argument, we could say that it is natural to have the thought process of wanting to torture someone. Since we thought of the idea of torture in the first place, it must be natural and part of human nature to think of this in the first place. The problem with Aquinas' argument is that anything we choose to do could be considered natural as it must be natural to have thought to do so.