situation ethics is a
relativistic, consequentialist
and teleological theory
relativistic+ this means there are no
universal moral norms or rules and
that each situation has to be looked
at independently because each
situation is different.
consequential+ this
means that moal
jusdgements should
be based on the
outcome or the
consequence of an
action
teleological+ means that it
is ciincerned with the end
purpose or goal of an
action- n this case the
goal should always be
self sacrificing love.
in 1966 Joseph fletcher published his
book situation ethics: the new
morality. his theory was based on one
guiding principle- agape. thsi is the
chirstian principle of selfless love. it is
the word used to describe gods love
for humanity and the love that
christians should show towards god
and other poeple.
key figures
joseph fletcher
was an american professor who
formalised the theory known as
situation ehtics in his book. he
was a leasing academic involved
in topics ranging from abortion to
cloniing. he was ordained as a
priest, but later identified himslef
as an athiest. he stated that we
should always use the principle of
love or agape and apply it to each
uniwue situation.
why did fletcher reject other
types of ethical approaches?
fletcher claimed that most
moral theories adopted either
an antinomian or a
leagalistics pproach to
ethics. he argued that neither
of these approaches works.
anitmoniaism and why fletcher
rejected it antinomiansim literally
means against law. a situationist
attitude based on the idea that people
are under no obligation to obey the
laws of ethics or morality as presented
by religious authorities. the situation
will provide the solution which can be
found through intuition/ use of a
persons conscience. fletcher rejected
this a she said with no guiding
principles there could well be moral
choas
leagalism and why
fletcher rejected it?
leagalism is an
attitude that exalts
laws above all other
considerations, e.g.
natural law. Fletcher
rejected this
approach as he said
it gave people no
choice but to follow
Fletcher referred to situation
ethics as the middle way
between both these
approaches. it has no rules,
but only one guiding principle
the application of agape- the
love which Jesus
commanded in the new
testament.
agape and the four working
and six fundamental
principles of situation ethics
the four working principles
pragmatism- the
proposed cource of
action must work
and be motivated
by love.
positivism- agape
provides justification not
proof for an ethical
decision. people must
accept that acting in the
most loving way is the
right thing to do.
personalism- the
desire to put
poeple, not laws,
first. the christian is
committed to love
people, not rules or
laws
relativism- the
right response will
depend upon each
uniqu situation.
poeple must
respond with
agape love to
each situation. a
supporter of
istuation ethics
avoids words like
never or always
as they believe
that
curcumstances
can always throw
up excepetions.
six fundamental
principles of
situation ethics
'the ruling norm of
any christian decision
is love, nothing else-
as st Paul said in 1
corinthians 13, love is
the basis of christian
decision making.
'only one thing is
intrinsically good;
namely, love:nothing
else at all.'- nothing is
good in and of itself
except for love.
intrinsicaly means
'belonging naturally to
or essential to.'
'love and justice are
the same, for justice
is love distributed,
noothing else' justice
is love at work in the
community.
''love wills the
good of others,
regardless of
feelings.' people
should show love
to all, even their
enemies, as agape
is selfless love.
'love's decisions are
made situationally, not
prescriptively.' people
have autonomy- the
freedom to make their
own decisions, but they
must use this freedom
responsibily and apply
love to ech situation.
'a living end
justifies the
means.' one
must achieve a
loving end and
one can perfrorm
any action in
order to achieve
this.
an example of the application of situation ethics
scenario: two conjoined twins have been born
by caesarean section. they are joined at the
head and if they remain joined then they have
approximately only 25% chance of survival.
a follower of situation ethics might
assess the situation as follows:
working principle: pragmatism- it is
practically possible to separate the
twins and there is likely to be a
loving outcome because when the
operation has ended at least one of
them will have a greater chance of
survivial.
working principle: relativism-
the course of action taken is
dependent on the situation as
conjoined twins are not always
joined at the head. each case
would be assessed differently. a
situationist would not say you
should always or never
separate conjoined twins.
working principle:
personalism- the medical
teams desire to save the
children is person- centered.
Fletcher would have argued
that they should performm this
operation even if it breaks the
law as it is the most loving thing
to do.
fundamental principle:
love and justice are the
same, for justice is love
distrubuted, nothing
else- by attempting to
save both the children,
even if one child dies,
they have acted out of
love and therefore fairly
ensured justice has
been served.
fundalmental principle: a
loving end justifies the
means- by achieving a
loving outcome and
saving at least one of he
children then the act of
performing the operation
and risking both their
lives will have been
justifiable.
fundamental principle:
love wills the good of
others, regardless of
feelings- even if the father
of the children is the
person who murdered the
surgeons mother, the
surgeon should still act in
a loving way towards the
children and their father.
as fletcher said we should
show love to all, even our
enemies. christian love is
unconditional. love wills
the good of others.
biblical evidence used to support situation ethics
john 15:13 in which jesus
states, 'no one has greater
love than this, to lay down
one's life for one's friends.'
this appears to support the
concept of agape love.
gslstisnd 5:14 'for the whole law is fulfilled
in one word, you shall love your neighbour
as yourself.' this appears to support one of
fletchers six fundamental principles ' the
ruling norm of any chirstian decision is love,
nothing else.'
mark 2:27 'the sabath was made
for man, not man for the sabbath.; -
some claim that jesus adopted a
relaticistic approach to ethics,' for
example he attacked the
pharisees' insistence on following
the torah or jewish law. this links
to fletchers four wokring principles-
relaticism
john 5:1-16 jesus
putpoeple first, he broke
sabbath laws to heal on
the sabbath- he healed
the paralysed man on the
sabbath. this links to
fletchers four working
principles- personalism
matthew 22@37-39 'love your
neighbour as yourself.' -jesus stated
that love is the highest principle above
the law. one of fletchers six
fundamental principles states ;the
ruling norm of any chirstian decision
is loe, nothing else.'
luke 6:27 jesus stated
that you should 'love your
enemies, do good to thos
who hate you.' one of
fletchers six fundamental
principles states 'loe
wills the good of others
regardless of others.'
to what extent is situation ethics
compatible with the traditional
teachin of one major world religon?
situation ethics IS compatible with
christian ethics
it is modelled on
the teachings of
jesus e.g.'love one
another as i have
loved you.' (john
13v34-5)
the idea of putting people
first (personalism) is in
keeping with the actions of
Jesus as recorded in the
bible. Jesus put people
first, he broke Sabbath
laws to heal on the
Sabbath- he healed the
paralysed man on sabbath
according to john chapter
5.
one of the six findamental
principles of situation ethics is only
the principle of love provides a
reasonable base by which to
make judgements of right and
wrong.' Jesus said and st Paul
taught love as the highest principle
above the law. ; for the whole law
is fulfilled in one word, love your
neighbour as yourself.'( st paul,
galatains 5v14)
another of the six fundamental
principles is 'love wills the good of
others, regardless of feelings.'
jesus used the parable of the
hood samaritan to emphasise his
point. (luke 10)
some chirstians argue that
the fundamental principle
'love's decisions are made
situationally, not
prescriptively' reflects the
christian belied in free-will/
autonomy.
some claim that jesus
adopted a relativistic
approach to ethics for
example he attacked the
pharisees' insitence on
foollowing the torah, or jewish
law - 'the sabbath was made
for man, not man for the
sababth.' (mark 2v27)
situation ethics IS NOT compatible
with christian ethics
situation ethics rejects aboslute
moral laws like the ten
commandments, but st Pau said that
love is the fulfulling of the
law.(romans 13v10)
situation ethics fails to
consider relgious tradition or the
teachings of church leaders. for
example, the bible states that
sec should only take place
iwthin marriage, but this theory
allows sex before marriage if it
is based on agape.
situation ethics fails to
consider religious tradition or
the teachings of church
leaders. for example, the bible
states that sex should only
take place within marriage,
but this theory allows sex
before marriage if it is based
on agape.
St Paul stated that 'love is
not the only desirable
quality'.... the fruit of spirit
is love, joy, peace,
patience, .....' (Galatains
5v22-23)
religious leaders, such as the pope ,
have rejected the rlativistic approach
of situation ethics. he said in april
2005, 'we are moving towards a
dictatorship of relativism which does
not recognise anything as for certain
and which has a sits highest goal
one's own ego and ones own
desires.... being an 'adult' means
having faith which does not follow the
wwaves fo today's fashions or the
latest novelties.'
situation ethics removes god as
the source of ultimate authority in
the universe and substitutes an in
his place.
what are the strengths and
weaknesses with situation
ethics?
strengths
situation ethics as a relativistic theory
is flexible and practical. it takes into
account the situation a person is faced
with and can help make decisions in
siutation where, from a legalistic view
all options are wrong. for example, to lie
in a particular situation inorder to save a
life. as Mel thomason states in his book
an introduction to philosophy and
ethics, ' it allows individuals to make up
their own minds about what is right or
wrong in particaular situation.'
situation ethics allows people
the individual freedom to make
decisions for themselves. which
many people nowawdays prefer
to the prescriptive/ legalistic
approach. as Mel thompson
states in his book an introfution to
philosophy and ethics. it allows
individuals to makeup their own
minds about what is rights or
wrong in any particular situation.
agape involves selfless love-
putting others first which should
ensure fairness and justice. as
sarah k. tyler and gordon reid
state in their book advanced
religious studies, 'love seeks the
well-being of others, even if the
course of action is not one of
preference.'
due to fletchers use of the
fundamental principle 'a loving end
justifies the mean', people would
have to consider the likely
consequences of their actions
before they take them and it is only
the consequences that have a real
effect on human well-being.
the idea of putting people before rules
'personalism' appears to be in keeping
with the actions of jesus as recorded in
the bible- healling the paralysed man,
john chapter 5.
weaknesses
many people argue we need rules to avoid
issues such as moral chaos.as J.Macqarrie
states in a dictionary of chirstian ethics. ' ... it
seems to be assumes that somehow one intuits
what is right in a situation rom the situation
itself. even if some people have this remarkabel
gift or insight, there are stages one the way to
moral maturity, and a great many poeple need
the guidance of rues and generalisations which
the community has built up from experience.'
situation ethics gives so much
freedom to the individual it is difficult
to decide what action to take. as
Bowie states in his book ethical
studies, how can individuals safely
decife what is the most loving
action?' this is because love is a
subjective concept.
agape is too subjective a
concept to be used practically, as
humans are prone to making
mistakes or being influenced by
selfishness rather that love as
edwin williams wrote in an article
entitles situation ethic: the new
morality, 'love ledt to itself can
easily tun into the licence of
permissiveness.' in others words
people could claim to perform any
act out of love when really they
are doing as they please.
people cannot accurately predict the
consequences of their actions. as peter
vardy and paul grasch state in the puzzle
of ethics ' it is not easy to determine the
consequences of actions and this the
situationist need to do.' a person might
think it loving in the short term to allow
their pregnant teenage daughter to have
an abortion; however, you cannot be sure
that in the long term this will not cause her
great distress and ultimately lead to
unloving consequeneces.