Situation ethics.

How does Situation Ethics use the principle of love to make moral decisions in different situations?

-Situation Ethics, developed by Joseph Fletcher in 1966, is a Christian ethical approach that judges each situation individually, guided by the principle of love (agape).

-Fletcher was inspired by Jesus’ teaching to “love thy neighbour as thyself,” + by Rudolf Bultmann, who emphasized the ethical message of Jesus over proving his divinity.

How does Fletcher’s Situationism differ from Legalism + Antinomianism in approaching moral decisions?

-Ethical approaches can be divided into three main types:

-Legalism (following fixed rules like the Ten Commandments),

-Antinomianism (rejecting all moral laws),

-Situationism, proposed by Joseph Fletcher.

-Situationism is a middle ground that considers the context of each moral decision, applying Christian love (agape) rather than rigid rules, because absolute laws don’t always work in real life.

Why does Situation Ethics prioritise the context of a situation over fixed moral rules?

-Situation Ethics focuses on making moral decisions based on the context rather than blindly following rules. Right + wrong depend on each situation, with no universal laws.

-Ethical actions aim for the greatest good + may override general principles if necessary.

-Examples include Jesus healing on the Sabbath + Fletcher’s cab driver who set aside principles to do the right thing.

How does Fletcher’s view of conscience differ from traditional Christian views + why does he describe it as a verb?

-In Situation Ethics, Fletcher rejects traditional views of conscience as intuition, divine guidance, cultural norms, or a reasoning faculty because these treat conscience as a “thing.”

-Instead, conscience is a verb - it’s the creative process of making moral decisions in each situation.

-Conscience doesn’t guide action by itself; it simply describes the process of weighing options to decide the most loving or appropriate action.

-Peter Vardy supports this, noting conscience isn’t a separate faculty but a term for the process of trying to act correctly in each unique situation.

How does Aquinas distinguish between synderesis + conscientia + how do they together form conscience?

-For Aquinas, conscience is the natural ability to understand right + wrong. He believed humans are naturally inclined to seek good (synderesis) + avoid evil, though mistakes happen when reason is misused.

-Conscience has 2 parts: synderesis, the habitual use of right reason to know basic moral principles + conscientia, the application of these principles in making moral decisions.

-Conscience, therefore, is both knowing what is right + choosing to act accordingly in complex moral situations.

What does Fletcher mean when he says “love is the only universal,” + how does Jesus’ behaviour support this idea?

-Joseph Fletcher argues agape (selfless love) is the only universal moral principle. Love isn’t something you have, it’s something you do.

-Because everyone can recognise what the most loving action is, our moral decisions should be shaped by agape rather than rules.

-Fletcher roots this in the Christian Gospel, pointing to Jesus’ actions - like breaking Sabbath laws to heal someone as examples of choosing love over legalism.

-For Fletcher, an action is morally right if it’s the most loving thing to do in that situation.

How does Fletcher describe agape + why is Jesus’ death seen as the ultimate example of this kind of love?

-Agape is the New Testament word for pure, unconditional Christian love. It’s selfless, disinterested + seeks only the good of the other person - like the unconditional love a mother has for her child.

-Fletcher describes agape as “goodwill at work in partnership with reason,” making it a deliberate, giving kind of love rather than a feeling of desire or liking.

-Agape aims for the neighbour’s good regardless of personal feelings. Its core is self-sacrifice, shown ultimately in Jesus’ death, where he willingly gave up his life out of love for humanity.

-Agape is unique because it reflects the very nature of God.

How do Fletcher’s 6 Fundamental Propositions show love must override all laws + moral rules in ethical decision-making?

-Love is the only thing intrinsically good= Actions aren’t good or bad in themselves - their goodness depends entirely on the circumstance + consequence. Only love is always good.

-Love replaces all laws as the ruling norm= Love is more important than any moral rule or religious law. Jesus showed this when he healed on the Sabbath, breaking the commandment because love took priority.

-Love and justice are the same thing= Justice is simply love distributed fairly. You can’t act lovingly without also acting justly toward everyone affected.

How do Fletcher’s 6 Fundamental Propositions show love must override all laws + moral rules in ethical decision-making?

-Love wills the neighbour’s good, even if we don’t like them= Agape seeks the good of others without expecting anything back. This captures the heart of Situation Ethics - do good regardless of personal feelings.

-Only the loving end justifies the means= Situation Ethics is teleological: you consider the consequences first. An action is only right if it leads to the most loving outcome - that end justifies the method used.

-Love decides in each situation, not rules= Every case is unique + must be judged on its own. Jesus stopping the stoning of the adulterous woman shows love can override strict rules when compassion is needed.

What does pragmatism mean in Fletcher’s Situation Ethics + how does the smothering-baby example illustrate it?

-Pragmatism means taking a practical approach to moral decisions. The focus is on what will work in this situation to produce the greatest love, rather than on strict rules or laws.

-A person might follow something like the Ten Commandments - but only if it actually leads to the most loving outcome. The morally right action is whatever achieves the most love.

-Example: A group in hiding would be discovered if a baby cries. The mother smothers the baby because this action protects the group + produces the greatest love. Situation Ethics calls this the pragmatic decision.

How does relativism explain why no action is intrinsically right or wrong?

-Relativism says no action is always right or always wrong - it depends entirely on the situation and the outcome. The morality of an action shifts based on what produces the most loving result.

-Something normally seen as immoral, like ending a life, could be considered the most loving option if the person is suffering with no quality of life.

-So, actions are only right or wrong relative to love in that specific moment.

How does positivism explain the link between belief in God + choosing the most loving action?

-Positivism means Fletcher begins with the faith-based belief that God exists + from that belief comes the commitment to act in the most loving way.

-Because faith leads people toward positive action, every moral decision should aim for the most loving + positive outcome.

How does personalism shift moral decision-making from following rules to prioritising people?

-Personalism means Situation Ethics focuses on loving people rather than obeying rules.

-Instead of asking “What must I do?” the situationist asks “Who needs help?”

-People matter because they’re made in God’s image, so they must always be treated as ends in themselves, never as tools.

-Decisions shouldn’t be selfish but should aim for the most loving outcome for everyone involved.

Situation ethics is a helpful form of decision-making.

-Situation Ethics is flexible because it allows people to decide what the most loving action is, giving freedom that legalism doesn’t allow. It isn’t lawless like antinomianism because it follows the guiding principle of agape - unconditional Christian love.

-Situation Ethics is built on a single guiding rule: agape, or love. Fletcher argues focusing on love produces positive outcomes, upholds justice + prioritises the needs of others. He outlines 6 fundamental principles to show how decisions should be guided by love rather than by laws, giving clear guidance for applying Situation Ethics.

-Situation Ethics is relative, so it isn’t limited by fixed moral rules. It considers life’s complexities + addresses situations where rigid absolutes may fail. Unlike Kantian ethics, which is strict, Situation Ethics allows sometimes the most loving choice might involve treating people as a means to an end.

-Situation Ethics is a practical + flexible approach to moral decision-making. Fletcher’s principles of pragmatism + relativism show actions are judged by the situation, not by absolute rules like “Do not kill” or “Do not steal.” Sometimes a more liberal approach to laws is necessary to achieve the most loving outcome, as Fletcher illustrates in his examples.

Situation ethics isn’t a helpful form of decision-making.

-Karl Barth criticises Situation Ethics as too vague, arguing it’s unclear how to determine the “most loving” action since it changes with each situation. He believes human corruption makes this approach unreliable + following divine revelation, like the Bible + Church tradition, provides clearer moral guidance.

-William Barclay argues Situation Ethics would only work if humans were perfectly good, like Jesus - “if all men were angels.” Augustine supports this, viewing humanity as fallen, prone to misusing free will rather than consistently choosing what’s loving.

-Traditional Christian thinkers have criticised Fletcher’s view of Jesus. In 1952, Pope Pius XII called Situation Ethics “individualistic + subjective,” warning it could justify decisions that go against natural law. Absolutes + laws exist to protect society, making legalism a safer + more reliable ethical approach than Situation Ethics.

-The rule of agape can be impractical because Situation Ethics might justify breaking religious laws like the Commandments, as well as civil laws. If society prioritised this system over established laws, it could undermine the foundations of social order.

-Fletcher uses extreme + rare examples, like dropping the bomb on Hiroshima or a mother smothering her child to protect a group, to illustrate Situation Ethics. Critics argue these cases are unrealistic, making his claim Situation Ethics is practical seem weak.

Fletcher’s situation ethics is an ethical religious approach.

-Fletcher sees Situation Ethics as a Christian approach to moral decision-making. It has a Biblical foundation: Jesus’ Golden Rule teaches treating others as we wish to be treated + St. Paul emphasises in Corinthians that love is the highest virtue. These show agape guiding ethical choices.

-Jesus sometimes set aside rules when the person’s needs were more important. He was willing to associate with those considered unclean, sinners, the sick + tax collectors, showing love over strict rule-following.

-Fletcher’s idea of agape is religious because it builds on Jesus’ actions of prioritising love over law. Situation Ethics aligns with the New Testament, as seen when Jesus healed a man with a paralysed hand on the Sabbath, showing love over strict rule-following.

-Fletcher was inspired by Jesus’ message of love, arguing Jesus taught only to “love thy neighbour as thyself.” His 6 fundamental principles all centre on love, such as the idea love seeks the good of others, whether we like them or not.

Fletcher’s situation ethics isn’t an ethical religious approach.

-Modern Christianity tends to follow a legalistic approach, based on absolutes like the 10 Commandments. Situation Ethics, being relative + situational rather than rule-based, is therefore seen as incompatible with this legalistic form of Christian ethics.

-The Catholic Church upholds the sanctity of life, always seeing the ending of human life as wrong. Situation Ethics, by contrast, makes such decisions relative to the situation, focusing on what produces the most loving outcome. This suggests Fletcher’s agape is more about practical outcomes than strictly religious morality.

-Traditional Christian thinkers have criticised Fletcher’s view of Jesus. In 1952, Pope Pius XII described Situation Ethics as “individualistic + subjective,” warning that it could justify decisions that go against natural law.

-The Catholic Church believes ethical decisions should be guided by multiple authorities, including the Bible, tradition + Natural Law. Fletcher, in contrast, relies on a single principle, agape, which the Church sees as insufficient for moral guidance.

The rejection of absolute rules by situation ethics makes moral decision-making individualistic + subjective.

-Situation Ethics can potentially justify harmful actions in the pursuit of love, because Fletcher allows the “end” to justify the “means.” Critics worry this could blur ethical boundaries, for example between euthanasia + wanton murder.

-Situation Ethics is criticised for being vague, relying on an unclear definition of love. Its relativism can be taken to an extreme, potentially justifying any action as long as it’s claimed to be “loving,” which raises concerns about ethical consistency.

-Situation Ethics has no fixed boundaries because it rejects legalism. It resembles antinomianism, as decisions are relative to each situation + can vary constantly.

-In Situation Ethics, Christian love can become overly individualistic. Complete freedom without rules may lead people to act selfishly or misuse their power in decision-making.

-Agape, as an unselfish + unconditional love, is an ideal that’s difficult to achieve in practice. People need rules to guide behaviour, since subjectivity alone cannot reliably determine right action. Proverbs 16:2 illustrates humans tend to justify their own ways.

The rejection of absolute rules by situation ethics doesn’t make moral decision-making individualistic + subjective.

-Fletcher believes laws are ultimately grounded in agape, or love. By acting out of love, people act lawfully in spirit, avoiding extremes + considering the well-being of others rather than just themselves.

-Agape acts as the “quality control” of Situation Ethics. Fletcher’s 4 presumptions test how agape is applied in practice, checking whether an action is practical + will produce a positive, loving outcome.

-Agape is the central rule of Situation Ethics. Fletcher argues by following this ethic of unconditional love, actions like murder or rape could never be justified in the name of love.

-Jesus exemplified Situation Ethics by treating love + justice as aligned. He wouldn’t have followed agape if it justified any act; rather, agape guided his moral decisions, such as breaking Sabbath laws to do what was loving + just.

-Situation Ethics occupies a middle ground between legalism + antinomianism. It does follow rules, but not rigidly; the same rule may not apply in every situation, allowing moral decisions to be guided by love.