Situation Ethics Flashcards
Who was Joseph Fletcher ?
[1905-1991] he wrote the book ‘Sitaution Ethics (1966)’
- he was an ordained episcopalian priest and an American academic who taught Christian and medical ethics
- he applies the foundation for agape live in his moral system, rejecting rigid rules and commandments
What did Fletcher believe ?
- he argued that love was what morality should serve (agape)
- he thought that someone making a moral decisions should be prepared to set aside the rules if it seemed that love would be better served doing so
-‘The situationist follows a moral law or violates it according to love’s need’ (Fletchers, ‘Situation Ethics (1966)’
Define positivism
Acting good or moral in situations without demonstrating it.
I.e Fletcher posits love as good
Define pragmatism
Acting, in moral situations, in a way that’s practical rather than purely ideologically
Define personalism
Ethics centred on people rather than laws or objects
What is the difference between extrinsic good and intrinsic good ?
Extrinsic good is good defined with reference to the end (its result it produces)
Whereas, intrinsic good would be good in and of itself, without any ulterior means
Archbishop William Temple : influence on situation ethics
- Fletcher studied Archbishop William Temple. Temple’s ethic was personalist and love centred :
“There is only ultimate and invariable duty, and its formula is ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself’. How to do this is another question, but this is the whole of moral duty’
What does Fletcher conclude from his early studies ? (Quote about situational ethics)
He concludes that love “regardless of the context” is “always good and right in every situation. Love is the only universal”
How does the Bible support situation ethics ?
In the New Testament Jesus makes love central. When Jesus was asked to say which commandment is first :
- ‘you shall love God will all your heart’…’you shall love your neighbour as yourself. There is no other commandment greater than these’ [Mark 12]
- St.Paul says “and now faith, hope and love abide … and greatest of these is love” [1 Corinthians]
Inspirations of Situation Ethics (people)
- Rudolf Bultmann : argued against the idea that Jesus sought to establish some new ethical ideology. Jesus had no other ethics than ‘love thy neighbour’
- Karl Barth : argued that ‘God’s commanding’ is not a rule applied individually to each specific example
- Dietrich Bonhoeffer : the will of God in any situation is based on : needs of one’s neighbour and the model of Jesus
- Paul Tillich : ‘The law of love is ultimate authority’
Fletcher’s perspective on legalistic ethics
- Fletcher doesn’t necessarily agree with legalistic ethics, he rejected legality approaches that’s were based on fixed laws
- e.g if murder was prohibited, one would have to clarify killing in self-defence, killing in war and abortion
- Legalistic ethics would attempt to come up with a fixed absolute answer despite situation
Fletchers perspective on antinomian ethics
- Fletcher was very critical of antinomian ethics, claiming that it was ‘ literally unprincipled, purely ad hoc and casual […] exactly anarchic’ [‘Situation Ethics’ (1966)]
- he believed that such ethics followed no order, structure or routine and simply moves from one situation to another
Fletchers 4 working principles
- pragmatism : being practical rather than following the belief in ideology or systems
- relativism : ‘The situationist avoids words like “never” and “perfect” […] he avoids “absolutely” [‘Situation Ethics’ (1966)
- positivism : love is posited as good without demonstration
- personalism : the legalistic puts law first, the situationist puts people first
What is the conscience for situationists ?
The conscience is the weighing up of the possible action before its taken, a kind of moral deliberation, rather than a faculty within a human being
Define Agape
Unconditional love
Is Fletcher’s argument relativist or absolute ? [AO2]
- many people will hold this argument as relativist, as it seems that situation ethics regards all law and focuses on the situation
- however, relativism holds that there can be NO universals. This is not the case for situation ethics
- Fletcher makes very clear that there is ONE universal and that is love
How does John 3:16 show agape in the New Testament ?
Agape is supposed to be a love that is self-sacrificing not self-satisfying. This agape love is the love God showed the world when he sent his son to die
How does John A.T Robinson support Fletcher’s situation ethics ?
- Robinson sees the idea of fixed moral truths as non existent when it comes to Jesus and the sermon on the mount
- arguing that precepts of Jesus are not supposed to be understood legalistically, ‘they are not legislation laying down the demands of everyone’
- instead these are illustrations of what love may require of anyone
What does Fletcher state is the difference between a Christian and a non Christian situationist ?
Ps. Fletcher have up his Christina belief but did not give up on his situation ethics
- he states the difference between the two is that Christian situationist clearly and directly equates good with agape (altruistic love that puts the needs of others before those of oneself)
- while non-Christian’s will find some other account (maybe Aristotle’s flourishing)
What are the 6 propositions ?
Fletcher developed six fundamental propostitions that the situationist should apply :
Love is =
- The only thing intrinsically good
- Deciding factor in Christian decisions
- Justice
- For your neighbour - friend or foe
5 . The end result - Situational
Corinthians 13:4-8 [quote]
“Love never fails”
How does Fletcher interpret the conscience ?
- conscience for a situationist is not about a soul or spiritual voice
-it is wrong to see conscience as a noun (name of something) instead it as a verb (action) - it acts as though conscience is a process of deliberation
William Barclay (critic of situation ethics)
“If we insist that in every situation man must make his own decisions. Then first of all we must make man morally lovingly fit to make that decision; otherwise we need the compulsion of law to make him do it”
Barclay essentially says if man has to make their own decisions based on the situation, we must ensure using law that EVERYONE does this morally and lovingly
He stresses that for freedom to be good. Love must be perfect … he says ‘freedom can become selfishness’
AO2 Evaluation of Barclay’s arguement
His argument fails because…
- legalism has worse downsides
- it may be true that some people would abuse autonomy, but arguably it is not as bad as legalistic morality which is outdated and inflexible
- the direction history shows progress in education, therefore in the future situation ethics will be beneficial
His argument is successful because…
- although people might appear approved in modern times, if granted that freedom (and thus power) to do what they want, they wont choose the msot loving thing to do [power corrupts]
- ## human nature is so corrupt that humans cannot freely make good decisions, instead need laws to do so
AO2 Evaluation : strengths
- it is adaptable to specific situations when rule based ethics are not always helpful
- provides a guide and support in a situation rather than rules
You are morally responsible when applying situation ethics as you cannot rely on the advice of others
AO2 Evaluation : weaknesses
- situation ethics does not actually offer a solution to solving moral problems,he just hopes that we will choose love with our conscience [offers a framework not a solution]
- what constitutes a situation ? How is it determined ?
- it’s teleological approach (focusing on the outcome of love) but how can you predict an action will bring about love ?
- doesn’t provide simple answers to difficult ethical questions, unlike rule based ethic
- it doesn’t specify who and when we apply love (i.e in abortion are applying love to the baby or mother)
- Fletcher is selective in the bible passags he picks
- human fallibility will cause individuals to be self interested
AO2 : Philosophical weaknesses
Rev. John Macquarrie
Argues that situationism is fundamentally and incurably individualistic - never a basis for social morality
D.Z Phillips
Argues “when one finds oneself in situations where, whatever one does one is going to hurt someone”
- essentially despite showing love to one person, some else is always going to get hurt
Is situation ethics a helpful method of moral decision making AO2 ?
Yes I would say it is helpful for moral decision making because if we were to take Augustine’s fall and believe the corrupt nature of humanity. This would mean our instinct and therefore morality is to do bad, therefore by following a universal law of love - it provides everyone religious or non religious with the opportunity to make moral decisions
