Situation Ethics Flashcards
antinomian ethics
do not recognise the role of law in morality
- no fixed moral principles
- ethics are spontaneous
- no guidance so rejected by Fletcher
legalistic ethics
law-based moral decision making
fixed moral laws to be obeyed at all times
an elaborate system of expectations and compromise
rejected in the 1960s
too strict so rejected by Fletcher
teleological ethics
moral goodness is determined by the end result
situational ethics
focused on the situation rather than fixed rules
middle ground between legalistic and antinomian
Fletcher believes in the absolute rule of love but that it must be applied situationally
relativism
the rejection of absolute moral standards such as laws or rights
Good and bad are relative to an individual or community or in Fletcher’s case to love
agape
unconditional love
the only ethical norm in a situation
extrinsically good
good defined with reference to the end consequences rather than good in itself
Fletcher argued only love is intrinsically good
conscience
term may be used and understood in many different ways
Fletcher described it as a function rather than a faculty
pragmatism
acting in moral situations in a way that is practical rather than purely ideological
personalism
ethics centred on people rather than laws
contextual relativism
we must judge each situation/context and do the most loving thing in each
means whatever we do may differ between situations but why we do it never changes
positivism
proposes something as true and good with demonstrating it
Fletcher posits love as good
what did Fletcher argue are the three possible approaches to moral life
legalism
antinomianism
situationism
why does Fletcher reject legalism
cannot accommodate exceptions to the rule
argues if you can reject one aspect of the law surely you reject it all
why does he reject antinomionism
it provides no foundation with which to evaluate one’s morality
offers no justification as to why people should live in any other way than they want to
what did Fletcher emphasise
the importance and role of the conscience in moral decision making
how is conscience traditionally understood by religious believers
as the voice of God giving us divine guidance by some intuition or part of reason which makes value judgements
how does Freud see conscience
as nothing more than the internalised values of our culture
how does Fletcher see conscience
as a verb not a noun
it is something you do when you make decisions as he puts it ‘creatively’
it is a mistake to treat conscience as a thing
what are the four different words to describe love
- eros
- stergo
- philos
- agape
what is eros
sensual or physical love
it can fade or stop completely
love we do not choose
what is stergo
affection
love especially between parents and children
philos
general love and affection attraction without regard for family relationships love for inanimate object compound forms friends
what is agape
Godly love shown to his creation whether they love him back or not
love culminated in the sacrifice of Jesus, the ultimate of agapeistic love
a verb
we must choose agape the same as God has chosen
love our enemies and neighbours the way God loves us
love that should inform our decisions
decisions not swayed by fickle emotions because agape isn’t an emotion
what are the features of agape
attitude not an emotion therefore it can be chosen
can be likened to respect or loving kindness
non preferential
what are the six fundamental propositions at the heart of Situation ethics
- love only is always good
- love is the only norm
- love and justice are the same
- love is not liking
- love justifies the means
- love decides there and then
what are the four working principles
underpin the 6 fundamental propositions
- pragmatism
- contextual relativism
- positivism
- personalism
pragmatism (4 wp)
- practical - we must be pragmatic
- good is what works and produced loving results
- don’t worry about the theory
- think about consequence - theory only takes us so far
contextual relativism (4 wp)
- what we do relative to situation but why we do it never changes
- we do it because most loving
- relative to love
- relativism but not complete not antinomianism or legalism
- middle way
- hard fixed rules create injustices
- you cannot legislate for every possible situation
positivism (4 wp)
- idea that because its difficult to define love its not always easy to know that we are doing the right/most loving thing
- sometimes you need to make an ethical leap of faith and hope you’re doing the right thing - use reason
- act in a way reasonable with the statement that God is love
- we must believe in the supremacy of love
- God is the bed rock of love
- Not straight forward as following the rules sometimes we just have to have faith
- no certainty
- people have different ideas of love
personalism (4 wp)
- in our decision making we put people before the law - its okay to break rules to put people first
- person at centre of moral decision making
- legalism more concerned with laws than people :(
- can acknowledge tradition but be prepared to put people above it
- demands people are not treat as a means to uphold law
give a quote about belief and love
it is not the unbelieving who invite damnation but the unloving
love is always good (6 fp)
- love is intrinsically good
- actions are good if they help people
- no absolutes except the law of love
love is the only norm (6 fp)
- Fletcher argued the conflicts Jesus had with the Pharisees were about love v law
- love should underpin a Christian’s decision even if it means disobeying law - must be ok if Jesus did it
- positivism - we only have law of love to follow
- harder to decide what to do than just follow the rules
love and justice are the same (6 fp)
- when we do what is just we are doing what is the most loving
- agape in practice means actions are just
- justice is love in action
- justice means working out the best for all concerned with no preferences
love is not liking (6 fp)
- non preferential because we don’t feel agape - it a chosen attitude applies equally to all
- you don’t need to like them to love and have agape
- love does not have favourite
- love enemies like your family
love justifies the mean (6 fp)
- love is what we are trying to create
- example of absolutism - something is not right or wrong in itself
- teleological - actions good or bad based on outcome
- only a loving end justifies mean
- destroying embryos to save life - war death toll
love decides there and then
- contextual relativism
- sometimes Jesus broke the rules
- situationists don’t use never or always in a moral sense as the action is deemed right or wrong given the situation
- what is right in one situation isn’t necessarily in another
- Jesus was arguably a situationist
give some of Barclay’s critiques of situation ethics
- its not always easy to be sure of what action is love
- unhelpful in everyday life
- Fletcher’s illustrations are drawn from the abnormal
- if there is no/not enough love then freedom can become selfishness or even cruelty
- a game would be chaos without rules
- it is the only ethic for a man come of age but man has not yet come of age and still needs the crutch and protection of law
- nothing is intrinsically good or bad
- Fletcher has shown that there can be situations in which a thing generally regarded as wrong could be the right thing to do. But that doesn’t prove is is good and the red light should not be removed
- some things in no circumstance can be right
- law is a summary of society’s experience of life and living, therefore to discard the law is to discard experience
what is the story of the Leper
Jesus heals a Leper by touching him
This was a violation of the law which taught that touching a Leper made you ritually unclean
He didn’t need to touch the Leper, there are other NT stories where he heals people from afar or without touch
but touching him was an act of love that gave the Leper dignity
what is the story of the man with the withered hand
Jesus heals on the Sabbath which was against the law of Moses
better to do good or harm - leaving him for another day is harmful when he could heal him there and then
broke the law in the Synagogue
even slaves get a day off to live humanely
he felt the Pharisees were hard of heart and unfeeling
Jesus challenges the attitude about the Sabbath as he didn’t feel it showed the greatest love to people
what is the question of the Sabbath
the Sabbath was made for the good of human beings they were not made for the Sabbath
Jesus disciples ate wheat Jesus justified it by saying David did it
when the law doesn’t help people it should be put aside
by the disciples breaking the heads of the wheat they were harvesting which was breaking the laws of Moses
- the law of no harvesting was not loving as it would leave Jesus’ men hungry
how are the 6 fp and the 4 wp shown in the leper story
personalism - people above the law
contextual relativism - Jesus didn’t need to touch him but it was right for the situation
love decides there and then - he was moved by pity
love justifies the means - give man dignity back no longer a social outcast
how are the 6 fp and the 4 wp shown in the man with a withered hand story
personalism - people above the law
positivism - love above the laws of the Sabbath
pragmatism
why wait till tomorrow when the man was right in front of Jesus
how are the 6 fp and the 4 wp shown in the question of the Sabbath
personalism - people above the law
law should help people
what is the highest law of Christianity
love
