Menu

Difference Between Morality and Law

0 Comment

Nietzsche critique Aquinas’ understanding of morality, in the context of national law, as one that does not agree with his own understanding. Nietzsche understands morality based on two claims. The first one is that morality, as an objectively justified standpoint, delivers objective truth about what people ought to do. The second one is that morality is based on the idea that people are responsible for what they do because they have free will. Nietzsche believes that morality is a bad thing and dangerous because it does not enhance life. Instead, it prevents people from accomplishing the advanced forms of life. which he refers to as the ‘splendour and highest power of the human type’. In addition, Nietzsche claims that people who are capable of realizing such advanced forms of life are ‘higher types’ or ‘free spirits’. Therefore, demanding people’s morality is precisely like encroaching the higher sort of a human being (Copleston 101).Aquinas argues that natural law is an ordinance of reason in the sense that it involves measures and rules of acts that induce people to act or restrains them from acting. As a result, it fosters their moral values. However, the measure and rule of people’s action is the reason. Furthermore, it is the major principle of human acts because it involves the reason for directing to the end. which is the major principle in every matter of the action. According to Aquinas, it, therefore, follows that natural law pertains to reason. He also understands an ordinance of reason as a practical reason. This is because it gives practical directions involving how a person is required to act, instead of speculative reason, which gives people the propositional knowledge of the reality (Copleston 212).