THEME 2A – JOHN FINNIS’ DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL LAW
Theme 2A – John Finnis’ Development of Natural Law (A01)
Examine John Finnis’ development of Natural Law [30]
John Finnis during the 20 th century in his work 'Natural Law and Natural Rights' (1980) created his
development of Natural Law, which is a is a deontological ethic based on Aquinas’ claims that
humans have an intrinsic rationality that leads them to do good and re-establish a right relationship
with God. Whilst Finnis agrees with Aquinas’ view that there is a natural law applicable to all
humanity, he does however argue that Natural Law’s purpose is rather to allow a person to ‘flourish’
and establish what is good for humankind.
Finnis first starts his theory by rejecting Aquinas’ five primary precepts as they are based on the
belief that God created purpose for humanity, replacing them with what he terms as ‘the 7 basic
goods’ which he believed were self-evident and participated in rather than followed like a set of
rules. These basic goods included: life, which covers bodily health and procreation; knowledge and
being well-informed; friendship and sociability; play; aesthetic experience to appreciate art; practical
reasonableness to solve moral problems; and religion, which concerns answering ultimate questions.
Finnis views the basic goods as universally and intrinsically good and from this, argues they offer a
framework in which a moral agent can choose their own actions.
Building on this, Finnis makes the distinction between practical reasoning (reasoning a right action
and how to act) and theoretical reasoning (reasoning the truth with knowledge) to demonstrate that
the basic goods are self-evident as we know them to be true practically in Natural Law, opposing
Aquinas’ view that Natural Law is derived from God. He further states that ‘Any sane person is
capable of seeing that …. basic aspects of human existence are, as such, good’ which reinforces this
view of the basic goods as self-evident, however he also makes the distinction that we are not
automatically aware of the need for ‘Practical Reasonableness’ and that these principles are only
known to the mature and well-educated.
This led to Finnis’ development of the ‘nine requirements of practical reason’ which he believed are
likewise self-evident and based on practical reasoning, helping to create the optimum conditions to
pursue the seven basic goods. These nine requirements are: view life as a whole and not live “merely
from moment to moment, following immediate cravings”; have no arbitrary preference or discount
,one of the basic goods; basic goods apply equally to all and take into account the good of others; do
not become obsessed with a particular project; use effort to improve and don’t repeat old habits;
plan your actions to do the most good to be most efficient in a utilitarian sense; never do an act that
directly harms a basic good even if it will indirectly benefit a basic good; foster common good in the
community to allow all individuals within a community to flourish; and act in your own conscience
and authority in accordance with practical reasoning. Thus, through the 9 requirements for practical
reason, Finnis argued we can decide how to participate in the basic goods by thinking reasonably
and holistically by pursuing all the goods and not prioritising one good over any other
Finally in his development of Natural Law, Finnis argues that individuals can most effectively pursue
the basic goods for themselves by fostering the common good and performing actions as a whole
community, supporting this by pointing towards humanity’s natural need to live in groups (required
by the basic good of Sociability and implicitly by all the other goods). He argues that, as the common
good requires community-wide actions, it is necessary for society to be coordinated through
authority to support the basic goods and Finnis believes this is done most effectively through the
rule of law (with some laws directly serving the basic goods such as the law against murder).
Additionally, Finnis maintained that laws create a stable environment where people have the
freedom and ability to pursue the basic goods, thus concluding law is a morally necessary
component of society as it enables humans to act in accordance with natural law and use our
practical reasoning.
In conclusion, Finnis in his development of natural law argues that we can flourish and determine
right actions through the self-evident 7 basic goods, with the nine requirements of practical
reasoning and the legal system supporting us to participate in them.
, Finnis Natural Law (A02)
Whether Finnis’ Natural Law is acceptable in contemporary society [30]
Whether Finnis provides a basis for moral decision making for believers and / or non-believers
[30]
The Strengths and Weaknesses of Finnis’ Natural Law [30]
The Effectiveness of Finnis’ Natural Law in dealing with ethical issues [30]
The extent to which Finnis’ Natural Law is a better ethic than Proportionalism [30]
Strengths
1. Both Teleological and Deontological
2. Clear guidance by set rules
3. Applied to secular society -> rejects using traditional religious monotheist fixed rules
Weakness
4. Requires Prediction of future outcomes
5. Conflicts with Catholic Church
John Finnis during the 20th century developed the deontological ethic of Natural Law based on
Aquinas’ claims that humans have an intrinsic rationality to do good. Whilst it can be viewed as
effective because of its firm basis in Aristotle and Aquinas’ developments and has stood the test of
time, the extent to which it is an effective approach to all ethical issues is debateable, however.
Firstly, one could argue Finnis’ Natural Law is an effective approach to ethical issues as it offers a
framework in which a moral agents can choose their own actions through the ‘basic goods’ which
establish what acts are good and bad, preventing morally wrong actions and enabling humanity to
‘flourish’ in the present rather than relying on reward in post-mortem existence like Aquinas’
development which is limited to religious belief. For example, a mob mentality may want capital
punishment, however Finnis’ ethic is more compassionate as it would have us pause and consider
that all humans deserve basic goods.
Further building on this, one could argue Finnis’ Natural Law is an effective approach to ethical
issues because it allows for the use of reasoning to think holistically on how to participate in the
basic goods through the 9 requirements for practical reason (having a broader appeal unlike
Aquinas’ development of natural law which is deontologically rigid in its teachings) Although Finnis
argues some acts are definitely wrong because they do not participate in a basic good, there is no
single correct act and agents are able to make different but equally moral decision, meaning it can
Theme 2A – John Finnis’ Development of Natural Law (A01)
Examine John Finnis’ development of Natural Law [30]
John Finnis during the 20 th century in his work 'Natural Law and Natural Rights' (1980) created his
development of Natural Law, which is a is a deontological ethic based on Aquinas’ claims that
humans have an intrinsic rationality that leads them to do good and re-establish a right relationship
with God. Whilst Finnis agrees with Aquinas’ view that there is a natural law applicable to all
humanity, he does however argue that Natural Law’s purpose is rather to allow a person to ‘flourish’
and establish what is good for humankind.
Finnis first starts his theory by rejecting Aquinas’ five primary precepts as they are based on the
belief that God created purpose for humanity, replacing them with what he terms as ‘the 7 basic
goods’ which he believed were self-evident and participated in rather than followed like a set of
rules. These basic goods included: life, which covers bodily health and procreation; knowledge and
being well-informed; friendship and sociability; play; aesthetic experience to appreciate art; practical
reasonableness to solve moral problems; and religion, which concerns answering ultimate questions.
Finnis views the basic goods as universally and intrinsically good and from this, argues they offer a
framework in which a moral agent can choose their own actions.
Building on this, Finnis makes the distinction between practical reasoning (reasoning a right action
and how to act) and theoretical reasoning (reasoning the truth with knowledge) to demonstrate that
the basic goods are self-evident as we know them to be true practically in Natural Law, opposing
Aquinas’ view that Natural Law is derived from God. He further states that ‘Any sane person is
capable of seeing that …. basic aspects of human existence are, as such, good’ which reinforces this
view of the basic goods as self-evident, however he also makes the distinction that we are not
automatically aware of the need for ‘Practical Reasonableness’ and that these principles are only
known to the mature and well-educated.
This led to Finnis’ development of the ‘nine requirements of practical reason’ which he believed are
likewise self-evident and based on practical reasoning, helping to create the optimum conditions to
pursue the seven basic goods. These nine requirements are: view life as a whole and not live “merely
from moment to moment, following immediate cravings”; have no arbitrary preference or discount
,one of the basic goods; basic goods apply equally to all and take into account the good of others; do
not become obsessed with a particular project; use effort to improve and don’t repeat old habits;
plan your actions to do the most good to be most efficient in a utilitarian sense; never do an act that
directly harms a basic good even if it will indirectly benefit a basic good; foster common good in the
community to allow all individuals within a community to flourish; and act in your own conscience
and authority in accordance with practical reasoning. Thus, through the 9 requirements for practical
reason, Finnis argued we can decide how to participate in the basic goods by thinking reasonably
and holistically by pursuing all the goods and not prioritising one good over any other
Finally in his development of Natural Law, Finnis argues that individuals can most effectively pursue
the basic goods for themselves by fostering the common good and performing actions as a whole
community, supporting this by pointing towards humanity’s natural need to live in groups (required
by the basic good of Sociability and implicitly by all the other goods). He argues that, as the common
good requires community-wide actions, it is necessary for society to be coordinated through
authority to support the basic goods and Finnis believes this is done most effectively through the
rule of law (with some laws directly serving the basic goods such as the law against murder).
Additionally, Finnis maintained that laws create a stable environment where people have the
freedom and ability to pursue the basic goods, thus concluding law is a morally necessary
component of society as it enables humans to act in accordance with natural law and use our
practical reasoning.
In conclusion, Finnis in his development of natural law argues that we can flourish and determine
right actions through the self-evident 7 basic goods, with the nine requirements of practical
reasoning and the legal system supporting us to participate in them.
, Finnis Natural Law (A02)
Whether Finnis’ Natural Law is acceptable in contemporary society [30]
Whether Finnis provides a basis for moral decision making for believers and / or non-believers
[30]
The Strengths and Weaknesses of Finnis’ Natural Law [30]
The Effectiveness of Finnis’ Natural Law in dealing with ethical issues [30]
The extent to which Finnis’ Natural Law is a better ethic than Proportionalism [30]
Strengths
1. Both Teleological and Deontological
2. Clear guidance by set rules
3. Applied to secular society -> rejects using traditional religious monotheist fixed rules
Weakness
4. Requires Prediction of future outcomes
5. Conflicts with Catholic Church
John Finnis during the 20th century developed the deontological ethic of Natural Law based on
Aquinas’ claims that humans have an intrinsic rationality to do good. Whilst it can be viewed as
effective because of its firm basis in Aristotle and Aquinas’ developments and has stood the test of
time, the extent to which it is an effective approach to all ethical issues is debateable, however.
Firstly, one could argue Finnis’ Natural Law is an effective approach to ethical issues as it offers a
framework in which a moral agents can choose their own actions through the ‘basic goods’ which
establish what acts are good and bad, preventing morally wrong actions and enabling humanity to
‘flourish’ in the present rather than relying on reward in post-mortem existence like Aquinas’
development which is limited to religious belief. For example, a mob mentality may want capital
punishment, however Finnis’ ethic is more compassionate as it would have us pause and consider
that all humans deserve basic goods.
Further building on this, one could argue Finnis’ Natural Law is an effective approach to ethical
issues because it allows for the use of reasoning to think holistically on how to participate in the
basic goods through the 9 requirements for practical reason (having a broader appeal unlike
Aquinas’ development of natural law which is deontologically rigid in its teachings) Although Finnis
argues some acts are definitely wrong because they do not participate in a basic good, there is no
single correct act and agents are able to make different but equally moral decision, meaning it can
