The question of abortion, as seen in the contrasting viewpoints of St.

Thomas
Aquinas and Friedrich Nietzsche, becomes a question of the value, or lack thereof,
of human life. Once the value of life is understood, the morality of abortion becomes
clear. Aquinas arguments that the inherent value of human life would make
abortion inherently immoral are contrasted strongly by Nietzsches concept that life
itself has no value unless lived a certain way.
In Nietzsches view of human life, it is important to keep two of his major
ethical philosophies in mind. The first is his concept of perspectivism which he
discusses in the third essay of his work, On the Genealogy of Morals. This idea
states that there is no overarching standard or morality for humans to follow. In
other words, there is no guideline that dictates how every human should act in a
given situation. This leads to a lack of inherently evil deeds which would make his
opinion of abortion depend not on the inherent value of human life, but the quality
of life.
To define the quality of life, Nietzsche discussed two basic moralities which
people fall into. These categories insinuate that morality is not based on an outside
standard of good and evil, but a subjective concept of good and bad. That is to say,
there is no innate value associated with each action making it good or evil, but
simply a concept that it is desirable to act in a way that promotes or affirms oneself.
Therefore, in the mind of Nietzsche, the moral person is the noble, the powerful,
the superior, and the high-minded person or, as Nietzsche names it, the
aristocratic class. This morality is derived from the etymological perspective, an
archetypical definition of ethics based on higher and lower ways of life. The
second, lower morality that Nietzsche discusses is known as the priestly class and
is classified by being weak, self-denying, and unhealthy. The morality of the priestly

class is simply an inversion of the aristocratic morality. Therefore, anything that

denies the desire to make life better for yourself, anything that is self-sacrificial, and
anything that denies the will to power is doing nothing more than holding back
the individual and the human race.
Consequently, abortion in an extreme situation would obviously be not only a
good thing to do, but a necessary thing to do if one wants to propel their potential.
For instance, in the case of a raped, single mother, Nietzsche would recommend
having the abortion because having the child would be an enormous burden. This
would obviously hold back the mother and those around her and, since there are no
intrinsic evils and the fetus contains no innate value, the obvious solution would be
to abort the baby. However, if a less extreme case is considered, Nietzsche would
still argue that the abortion was desirable. For instance, if a couple in China decides
to abort their female fetus because they are allowed only one child and males thrive
more readily in Chinese culture, in Nietzsches opinion, the abortion is still validated.
The family can support the child well but they dont want a girl and, since the fetus
holds no value and a girl would hold the family back from achieving social potential,
they should have the abortion.
In contrast to Nietzsche, St. Thomas Aquinas clearly states that there is an
ordered value in human life due to the structure of the universe. Aquinas highlights
the fact that humans are inherently reasonable creatures who are made unique and
unrepeatable. This contrasts with Nietzsche because he states that humans are not
necessarily rational as infants and that humans are not made unique, but neutral.
This however is somewhat unreasonable because, as found in Aquinas Summa
Theologica, humans would have to be inherently rational because they cannot
receive rationality spontaneously. In addition to this, Aquinas speaks about humans

being made beautifully and wonderfully unique. As stated in the Catechism of the
Catholic Church, Every human life, from the moment of conception until death, is
sacred because the human person has been willed for its own sake in the image and
likeness of the living and holy God.
It is pivotal for Aquinas perspective that an understanding of the life of the
fetus be realized. Though he lived in a time that did not allow him to fully know the
modern understanding which has led the Church to promulgate official teaching that
life begins at the moment of conception, it can be assumed that Aquinas would
have agreed with the Church on this. Aquinas actually agreed with the
understanding of his time that a soul is not infused until a certain time in the
pregnancy, but stated that abortion was always gravely evil because it defies the
Natural Law. Consequently, when Aquinas Four Criteria of a moral action are
applied, abortion fails in its species because it intrinsically harms human life.
This gives insight into Aquinas understanding of the purpose of human life.
Aquinas sought to incorporate the philosophy of Aristotle into Christian morality.
One of the ways in which he did this was by making use of one of Aristotles famous
metaphors which states that a knife is judged by how well it performs as a knife. For
instance, it must be sharp, durable, sturdy to grip, etc. Once these qualities are set,
one can judge how good or bad a knife is. In the same way, to determine how good
a human is, one must first discover the qualities that make a human good. For
Aquinas, these qualities hinge on one overarching quality: the honest pursuit of
ultimate happiness which he defines as complete union with God in heaven.
It is necessary in St. Thomas view to uphold human life in all cases because,
the ultimate goal of humanity is to attain true happiness which can only be found in

God. Abortion in the case of the Chinese family aforementioned, would be

considered inherently wrong because the baby is a unique human with reason and
intrinsic value that is supported by a right to life which transcends any human
authority. Furthermore, in Aquinas view, the single mother who was raped also
would be committing a grave evil because there is no reason a human can deny the
rights of an innocent human who is made in the image and likeness of God. As
stated by Pope Saint John Paul II in his encyclical, Evangelium Vitae, Even in the
midst of difficulties and uncertainties, every person sincerely open to truth and
goodness can... come to recognize in the natural law written in the heart the sacred
value of human life.
Nietzsches view of human life relies on the ideal of perspectivism and the
distinction between the two caste systems. His perspectivism self destructs as an
applicable reason for there being no inherent evils because, saying there is no
overarching value is an overarching value itself. Therefore, we must follow the
concept of Aquinas who states that there are some things that are inherently evil.
An example of this is that stealing for a starving family may bring the starving
family food, but the act of stealing in and of itself is still wrong. On the matter of the
two caste systems, if one closely examines the nature of these moralities, it
becomes obvious that they are not actually moralities as much as preferences.
Nietzsche himself mentions that his concept of the purpose of life is more of a
personal idea that people should try to be what they want, rather than live their
lives according to a general morality. Aquinas, on the other hand, states that there
must be a being that embodies the ultimate example of what every human should
strive for. This ultimate being is God who is the happiness which all humans
naturally desire and the good by which human morality must be judged.

Additionally, both the initial and final goals of abortion are naturally disordered.
Aquinas would argue that the initial goal of abortion is destructive and wrong in that
it is to end the life of the fetus, and the ultimate goal is not to obtain true
happiness, but to avoid a discomfort of this world.
The matter of abortion, therefore, is answered most decisively by St. Thomas
Aquinas standpoint. In his morality, this matter is concrete and unwavering
because of his unchanging definition of human life which neither contradicts itself
nor makes unclear any circumstance. In both situations, it is his definition of the
value of human life which dictates the results. In Nietzsches view, there is both
contradiction and uncertainty in the fact that the actions that should be taken in
each situation are based not on a decisive definition, but an opinionated neutrality.
Finally, Nietzsches philosophy on the matter of avoiding poorness and weakness
crumbles in contradiction beneath the veil of unfailing love; In the words of Blessed
Mother Theresa, It is a poverty that a child must die, so that you may live as you
wish.