Does Aquinas's natural law, with its primary precepts and doctrine of double effect, provide a reliable guide to moral action, or is it too rigid and dependent on a fixed human nature?
Component 02 Natural law: Aquinas's four tiers of law, the primary and secondary precepts, real and apparent goods, and the doctrine of double effect, with strengths and weaknesses as an ethical theory.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to natural law. Covers Aquinas's four tiers of law, the five primary precepts and the secondary precepts derived from them, real and apparent goods, and the doctrine of double effect, with the strengths and weaknesses and the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
OCR Component 02 opens with normative ethical theories, the first being natural law as set out by Aquinas. Natural law is an absolutist, deontological and teleological theory: morality is grounded in a fixed human nature that reason can read, directing us towards our God-given purpose. You study the four tiers of law, the primary and secondary precepts, the distinction between real and apparent goods, and the doctrine of double effect. The exam rewards explaining the system precisely and then evaluating whether it is a reliable guide to action.
The answer
The four tiers of law
The primary precepts
Secondary precepts and real and apparent goods
The doctrine of double effect
Strengths and weaknesses
- Strengths: it is rational (open to all, not just believers), universal, gives clear guidance through the precepts, and is flexible in hard cases through double effect and secondary precepts.
- Weaknesses: it rests on a fixed human nature and a single telos that evolution and moral pluralism call into question; it can be rigid about secondary precepts (for example on contraception); and it arguably commits the naturalistic fallacy by deriving an "ought" from what "is".
Examples in context
Try this
Q1. "Natural law is too rigid to deal with the complexity of moral decisions." Discuss. [40 marks]
- What the marker wants. An AO2 essay weighing the rigidity of fixed secondary precepts against the flexibility of double effect and the real-apparent good distinction, judging how well the theory handles hard cases. AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15.
Q2. Assess whether the doctrine of double effect is morally convincing. [40 marks]
- Cue. Double effect rests on the intention-foresight distinction. Weigh whether intending a harm is genuinely worse than foreseeing it with certainty, against the consequentialist view that only outcomes count, and judge.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of OCR exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
OCR H573/02 2018 (style)20 marksAssess whether natural law is a helpful method of moral decision-making. (The full OCR tariff for this essay is 40 marks; the worked answer below is scaled to a 20-mark exemplar.)Show worked answer →
A 40-mark Component 02 essay on the six-level scheme (AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15). Explaining the theory earns AO1; the higher levels reward judging how helpful it is.
Explain (AO1). Aquinas grounds morality in human nature directed by reason towards the good. There are four tiers of law (eternal, divine, natural, human); reason discerns five primary precepts (preserve life, reproduce, educate, live in society, worship God); secondary precepts apply them; we pursue real goods and avoid apparent goods that only seem good.
Evaluate (AO2). Strengths: clear, universal, rational and flexible through double effect. Weaknesses: it rests on a fixed human nature and a single telos that evolution and pluralism question; it can be rigid on secondary precepts; the naturalistic fallacy (deriving ought from is) threatens it.
Judge. A top answer decides whether natural law guides decisions well or rests on contestable assumptions, and defends the verdict.
OCR H573/02 2021 (style)20 marksCritically assess the doctrine of double effect. (The full OCR tariff for this essay is 40 marks; the worked answer below is scaled to a 20-mark exemplar.)Show worked answer →
A levels-of-response essay testing AO1 understanding of double effect and AO2 evaluation of it.
Explain. Double effect permits an action with a good intended effect and a foreseen but unintended bad effect, provided the act is not itself wrong, the bad effect is not the means to the good, and the good outweighs the bad. The standard case is giving pain relief that may shorten life: death is foreseen, not intended.
Evaluate. Strengths: it captures the moral weight of intention and resolves hard medical cases. Weaknesses: critics doubt the intention-foresight distinction is morally real, since a doctor foresees the death as certainly as if intending it; consequentialists say only outcomes matter.
Judge. A high-level answer weighs whether intention can carry the moral load double effect places on it, and reaches a justified conclusion.
Related dot points
- Component 02 Situation ethics: Fletcher's agape, the four working principles (pragmatism, relativism, positivism, personalism) and the six fundamental principles, with strengths and weaknesses as an ethical theory.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to situation ethics. Covers Fletcher's principle of agape, the four working principles (pragmatism, relativism, positivism, personalism) and the six fundamental principles, with the strengths, weaknesses and AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 02 Kantian ethics: the good will and duty, the categorical imperative and its three formulations (universal law, ends in themselves, kingdom of ends), and the summum bonum, with strengths and weaknesses.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to Kantian ethics. Covers the good will and acting from duty, the categorical imperative and its three formulations (universal law, ends in themselves, the kingdom of ends), and the summum bonum with the postulates of freedom, immortality and God, plus the strengths, weaknesses and AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 02 Utilitarianism: Bentham's hedonic calculus, Mill's higher and lower pleasures and harm principle, and the contrast between act and rule utilitarianism, with strengths and weaknesses.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to utilitarianism. Covers Bentham's principle of utility and hedonic calculus, Mill's qualitative distinction between higher and lower pleasures, the contrast between act and rule utilitarianism, and the strengths and weaknesses (calculation, the tyranny of the majority, justice) the exam asks you to evaluate.
- Component 02 Conscience: Aquinas's theological account (ratio, synderesis, conscientia) and Freud's psychological account (the super-ego and guilt), with the contrast between conscience as reason and conscience as a construct.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to conscience. Covers Aquinas's account of conscience as reason (ratio, synderesis, conscientia, vincible and invincible ignorance) and Freud's account of conscience as the super-ego producing guilt, with the contrast and the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 02 Applied ethics (euthanasia): the sanctity of life and quality of life principles, voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia, and the application of natural law and situation ethics to end-of-life decisions.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to euthanasia. Covers the sanctity of life and quality of life principles, voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia, the active/passive distinction, and how natural law, situation ethics and utilitarianism apply to end-of-life decisions, with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
Sources & how we know this
- OCR A Level Religious Studies (H573) specification — OCR (2016)
- Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica (the Treatise on Law) — Project Gutenberg (1274)