tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2984312446057999411.post5021288983340953663..comments2023-06-25T08:47:47.358-05:00Comments on Sioux City Deacon Formation: Moral Theology 1 - Aquinas on LawDeacon Davidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04773422293103065041noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2984312446057999411.post-69620033735021569662010-08-21T18:05:05.050-05:002010-08-21T18:05:05.050-05:00Ideally, measure the good or bad of the act. For ...Ideally, measure the good or bad of the act. For Aquinas, law is not merely self-referential, so it's not measuring "goodness" as defined by itself (that would be "do it because I said so," which is hardly rational or related to the Logos). Law is supposed to measure the goodness of the act, in reference to a rational (hence objective and universal) standard of acting.<br /><br />In Aristotelian terms, that rational standard is "Nous," or the intellectual first principle. That means that the goodness of human acts is conceived in terms of what promotes the Nous, the reason itself. So Aristotle famously defines virtue as a fixed habit of meeting a mean between two extremes (too little, too much). Law forms its subjects to this habit and to this mean.<br /><br />In Christian terms, of course, "Nous" is the Logos, and what promotes the Logos for us is faith (and all its associated bits). The habit and the mean remain much the same, but expanded to include the person of the Logos, and the acts of faith. Law still forms its subjects to this habit and to this mean.Deacon Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04773422293103065041noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2984312446057999411.post-75873216936149989402010-08-20T19:07:02.159-05:002010-08-20T19:07:02.159-05:00I am not quite sure I understand the measure of ac...I am not quite sure I understand the measure of acts. Measure the good or bad or the device that tells us what we did in relationship to the law?RSalockerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02872207136065275648noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2984312446057999411.post-57505102229611542112010-08-20T09:24:04.549-05:002010-08-20T09:24:04.549-05:00Well, in general I think law does induce people to...Well, in general I think law does induce people to conform to some common vision of the good. That statement doesn't work nearly as well in the particular, though, and when you're talking about human law, the vision of the good aimed at may be quite distorted, so that people can be malformed with respect both to the law and to the good. But that's not the fault of law as such, but rather of imperfections and abuses of law.<br /><br />But that's really about the function of law, rather than its definition. Could law be something other than a "rule and measure of acts," and still function in this broad manner?Deacon Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04773422293103065041noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2984312446057999411.post-89789844899605452192010-08-19T19:20:21.418-05:002010-08-19T19:20:21.418-05:00I am not sure I completely agree with his definiti...I am not sure I completely agree with his definition of law, Does it really induce someone to act in a certain fashion? Especially for the good?RSalockerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02872207136065275648noreply@blogger.com