Natural Law exam

This is the question we have to do an exam on, tell me what you think about my paragraphs. I’m doing OCR A-Levels .
‘Access how helpful Natural law is as a normative ethical theory.’
Intro- this essay will argue that natural law fails to act as a helpful method of Moral decision making. It will do this by examining Aquina’s primary precepts, the conception of telos and the theories reliance on reason.

Para 1- Natural Law is not helpful as the assumption on Synderesis is defined as incorrect. The key precept of the synderesis principle is ‘good should be done and evil avoided.’ This principle is innate writhing all God’s creation as it’s believed that humans have inherited a propensity of Adam. However, humans have the desire to do good, but get confused with real and apparent goods. Aquinas was influenced by the work of Aristotle to produce his work Summa Theologica and reinforced the idea that humans intentions are to aim to their telos ‘eudaimonia’. Therefore, according to Aquinas, humans are good. However, Thomas Hobbes reinforced the idea that humans are not innately good, but instead evil beings. He claims that without laws set by the government, humans would only do evil. Therefore, Aquinas set out the five precepts with the most important ones; to preserve life and health, to worship God and to reproduce. Furthermore, he set out examples of the secondary precepts asa a guide. One could argue that we don’t need the Bible or church in order to understand Natural law. Charles Darwin argues that humans weren’t designed by God and we don’t enherit goodness and we live to survive. Therefore natural law reinforces the idea that the synderesis principle is incorrect.

This is one of my paragraphs. What do you think?