One criticism aimed at natural law is that it falls foul of the naturalistic fallacy, but as we will see there are good reasons both for doubting the validity of this very term, and that it could be applied to natural law.

John Finnis, in a conversation with Peter Vardy, says that the neo-scholastics were confused by the order in which we come to know nature and the ontological order itself. We understand human nature by understanding human goods, BUT these goods do depend on the way we are. We look to objects, act, capacities and therefore to nature. The failure to make the distinction between these two ways = the naturalistic fallacy.

Vardy says:

“Controversially, Finnis starts with the argument that Aquinas, properly interpreted, was an ethical non-naturalist. He argues that the ‘basic goods’ of natural law appeal directly to reason without any need to make particular observations of nature”

But Finnis is simply noting that Aquinas’ first principles are axiomatic. If they were derived from some prior observations then those observations themselves would require further underpinning.

Thomas Storck says in the post I linked to from here, that:

“Moral goodness is in fact a subset of ontological goodness, a part of ontological goodness applicable only to creatures with intellect and will”

and

“Moral goodness and badness are simply that part of ontological goodness or badness which is more or less subject to our free choice. And because our possession of intellect and will is what specifically distinguishes us from the other animals, who lack those endowments, the goodness or badness which depend upon our intellect and will mark out a human being as good or bad more clearly than any mere ontological deficits, deficits which have absolutely no moral aspect. Thus a bad man is not someone who is blind or lame, but someone who steals or cheats and so on.”

Finally, Phillipa Foot, in her commentary on ‘thick concepts’ argues that some terms such as ‘rude’ ” undermine the is-ought gap: calling something rude is evaluative because it expresses condemnation in the same kind of way as bad and wrong do, but this evaluation can be derived from evaluative description. “

(https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-non-naturalism/#NatFal)

In summary, criticisms of natural law which rely on some version of the naturalistic fallacy should be used with care.

There have been a few areas that haven’t come up over the last two years – From the year 1 modules:

Augustine – original Sin and Grace

Death and the Afterlife – Heaven, Hell and Purgatory

Knowledge of God – Natural Theology

Christian Moral Principles – Bible/Agape

The Year 2 modules:

Pluralism

Gender and Society

Liberation and Marx

This makes it rather tough to have any kind of an educated guess as the field is so wide. I would be surprised though, if Pluralism didn’t come up, as that is essentially two topics. Perhaps also a question on Liberation. You could do worse than do some practice questions in these areas anyway. In future posts I will attempt to write some exemplar answers for the three modules.

Ethics is the least easy area to guess at possible questions. Most of the topics in it have already come up. However, situation ethics and utilitarianism are possibilities, as they have come up the least. I would guess perhaps something on the rejection of absolute moral rules by situation ethics, and maybe something on whether it is possible to measure good. In the year 2 Ethics topics, sexual ethics has not come up yet. Therefore a question on whether religious beliefs should have a bearing on sexual morality might come up. You might want to have a go at doing an essay on each of those topics to practise.

Having had a look at the questions which have come up in the last two years for both AS and A Level, I have arrived at a list of topics and sometimes questions for each area which could possibly come up. Some of these are more likely than others to do so.

PHILOSOPHY

Two topics have never come up at all – Plato and 20th Century approaches to religious language. I think it is likely that one of the year 2 questions will be on either falsification, verification or Wittgenstein. A question on Plato’s understanding of reality or his theory of Forms is possible.

Other areas in philosophy might be Mind body and soul – materialism, Anselm’s ontological argument or one of the theodicies.

Edit: I’ve decided to add some possible questions:

To what extent does Plato’s theory of the Forms make sense of reality?

‘Religious texts are best interpreted non-cognitively’ Discuss.

‘Aquinas view of religious language is no longer valuable’ Discuss.

Critically evaluate soul-making theodicies.

Stay tuned for tomorrow’s post on Ethics questions.

Well it’s the last exam and in many ways I believe the trickiest. Development of Christian Thought, especially in year 2, covers a vast area including such topics as secularism, pluralism and its influence on society as well as theology, and feminism’s influence on theology. There is also a topic on Marx and Liberation Theology. These are all areas which most teachers will not have taught before 2 years ago, even if they have studied them before. I found the year 2 DCT to be a genuinely fascinating area to study with my students – our discussions covered so many interesting themes such as gender politics and feminism, Christianity and its relation to our culture and so on. But I have to admit it  is a challenge getting students ready to actually answer questions in these areas.

I will give some question examples which are really not predictions, but just topics that I will explore how to answer questions in.

‘Ruether’s approach to theology does not go far enough to be truly feminist’. Discuss

To what extent is Western culture Christian culture?

‘Universalism is incoherent.’ Discuss

‘Christ is more a teacher of wisdom than a political liberator’ Discuss

Over the next few days I hope to post some answers to these questions.

I have two more possible questions (see last post for the Augustine one):

“God cannot be known through reason alone.” Discuss.

For this you would be able to use people like Calvin and Aquinas, who viewed things differently but who would both agree with the statement. The question is about the validity of natural theology, and whether it is enough for knowledge of God.

Critically assess the extent to which Christian ethical principles can be based on the Bible alone.

This question involves looking at Protestant views based on ‘sola scriptura’ or the principle that the Bible alone can be an authority, or looking at the Catholic belief that Bible, tradition, and reason have to all be involved in moral decisions.

OK, good luck!

The previous post included a possible question for the Augustine topic, and a link to my mind map on the pre and post-lapsarian will (pre and post Fall).

Some things to bear in mind when looking at how Original Sin corrupts humans and societies:

• The will is key to it in Augustine. The will is seen as love, love of self and love of neighbour. Before the Fall these are in harmony.
• These are respectively, cupiditas and caritas. They can work together in the friendship of Adam and Eve before the Fall. No lust or concupiscence has entered into that relationship and brought about strife and conflict.
• The will orients itself in friendship as a cohesive force over soul and body – there is no division in the will in the garden of Eden.
• After the Fall pride drives itself as a wedge between caritas and cupiditas such that there is now a division in the will. Human beings begin to experience a conflict between their own desires and what should be accorded to others.
• Pride is both the sin of Adam and the sin of the fallen angels (chiefly Lucifer). Now true friendship is only possible by putting Christ first, then love for neighbour is generous, forgiving and removed from cupiditas.
• So Christ is the remedy for the weakened will.

Next post: Knowledge of God’s Existence question.

In this post I want to look at some elements of Augustine’s view of human nature, as we identified in part 1 that this topic is likely to come up in the DCT exam.

I did previously write an answer to the question ‘To what extent has Augustine’s teaching on human nature caused more harm than good?’ Click on the link to have a read of it. It may not be exactly how you would answer a question in the exam, but it should provide food for thought on this topic.

In this answer I reject the idea that Augustine has been responsible for the guilt and sexual hang-ups of people in the West. I also consider other accusations against Augustine such as his ideas on women being responsible (his ideas being responsible!) for gender inequality and patriarchal structures, or that these patriarchal structures have caused Western Imperialism and conflict. These are obviously fairly heavy charges to lay at the feet of one man! Augustine was influential on Christian thought however, so it is possible that he contributed to these things, but only if you consider that these things are attributable to Christianity rather than, say, industrial capitalist societies.

Let’s consider a different question:

Critically examine Augustine’s view that human nature and societies are corrupted by Original Sin.

Have a look at this mind map then try and write a timed essay as revision on this topic.

I hope today’s Ethics exam went well for all of you. My year 12 students were quite happy with the questions – they fell into the same pattern of being on the three subjects that hadn’t come up last year again, so that was good. Plus 2 of them were fairly general questions – critically examine Utilitarian theories, and evaluate responses to voluntary euthanasia (or something along those lines), while the third was about the concept of agape in situation ethics.

If you look at my post here I actually write a paragraph evaluating the concept of agape in my prediction for today’s exam! Am I some kind of wizard or what!

My next task is to see what I can do on the development of Christian thought topic.

So last year there were questions on universalism in Death and the Afterlife, Jesus’ teaching in The Person of Jesus, and Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s teaching on civil disobedience in Christian Moral Action.

Therefore it is likely that we will see questions on Augustine, Knowledge of God’s Existence and Christian Moral Principles.

In my next post I will outline in more detail some areas to look at and try and do some more exemplar work for this. I’ll also look at the examiner’s report from last year and give some advice.