Situation ethics

What is the context out of which situation ethics came from?

• Joseph Fletcher, an evangelical Christian

• published in a 1966 book

• 1960s were a period of great change defined by radical social movements

• more sexual freedom, women were having greater roles in the workplace

• power dynamics between races were changing

Where does Fletcher place his normative ethical theory? And why is this?

• as a middle ground between legalism and anti-nomianism

• he believes any legalistic system that prescribes what to do in any circumstance will encounter situations where it is inappropriate to follow that rule

What is agape love? Where does Fletcher get this as the guiding principle from?

• non-preferential, brotherly love

• the willing of the good of a neighbour

Has Biblical and Christian foundations:

• Jesus commanded his disciples that to love their neighbour as themselves was the most important commandment

• in Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus makes an example of the Mosaic law is not prescriptive but there to guide. Jesus’ disciples pluck heads of what during the Sabbath, day of rest. Jesus declares that “the Sabbath was made for man, not man for Sabbath”, emphasising that religious legalism is not to harm human wellbeing. Jesus bypasses a law out of love for his neighbour

• Jesus in this teaching also refers to the example of the King David, who, when he and his men were hungry, ate consecrated bread from the holy temple. Human necessity took precedence over ritual

What are the four working principles?

Pragmatism

Relativism

Positivism

Personalism

They guide us in identifying how agape is best served.

What are the six propositions?

• love is the only intrinsically good thing

• love is the Christian ruling norm

• love and justice are the same

• agape love is not liking - it is non-preferential

• only the end justifies the means

• decisions need to be made situationally

What is the significance of pragmatism?

Pragmatism - american philosophy grounding truth value in what is useful, what works.

We should have a similar standard for what is morally right - that which is useful in enabling us to make decisions that work.

This theory is practical.

What is the significance of relativism?

• the right thing to do isn’t fixed or prescribed in advance of meeting the situation

• the right thing to do is the loving action, relative to the circumstances

What is the significance of positivism?

• the gap between what is the case and what ought to be the case means that one has to make a leap when you adopt values and ethical framework

• for Fletcher, you have to make a leap of faith, freely deciding to believe in God and the values, with love being the axiomatic value

What is the significance of personalism?

• moral decisions affect people

• there is only good for somebody - a state of affairs can’t be described as good in the abstract

• when we try to achieve a loving outcome, we have to place people and their lives at the forefront of our minds

• when you care for the person, it is similar to loving God (as seen in the gospels)

What is the significance of Fletcher’s first proposition?

Only love is good in itself

• sometimes things are good as a means to something else, e.g. a vaccine to prevent disease

• any other thing is good as instruments for love, or in its connection to love/a loving outcome

• love is a predicate that defines our actions

What is the significance of Fletcher’s second proposition?

Love is the only ruling norm

• this is directly commanded by Jesus in his parables and when he summarises all of the law in two instructions: love God, love your neighbour as you love yourself

• this means that if something from the law would be contrary to what love requires, love will always trump this law

• Biblical authority for this: Jesus says David, king of Israel, did the right thing when he gave his people holy bread in order to prevent them from starving

• love can thus justify anything

What is the significance of Fletcher’s third proposition?

Love and justice are the same.

• acting lovingly for Fletcher demands an impartiality which justice also requires

• acting lovingly means acting benevolently

What is the significance of Fletcher’s fourth proposition?

Love is non-preferential. It is not liking.

• love belongs to the will, not an emotional faculty

• it is unlike eros (romantic) and philia (brotherly) - it is a disinterested, non-preferential, impartial love

• a benevolent concern for the welfare of everyone impacted by our actions

What is Fletcher’s view of conscience?

• it is a verb, not a noun

• a verb that describes the act of making decisions creatively, wrestling with the question “what is the loving thing?”

What are some of Fletcher’s examples of moral decisions made situationally?

• Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who joined a plot to assasinate Hitler and was a Protestant Theologian and pastor. Fletcher uses this as an example where deciding to murder someone appears to be the loving deliberation

• A German prisoner of war can only be freed by being impregnated by Russian guard, despite her having a husband and child at home. Her family accepts her back nonetheless, and her husband loves the child. Adultery is permitted, because it reunited a family and put the welfare of real people in front of legalistic framework

• An unmarried couple living together might be viewed as more pleasing to God than a married couple living with mutual disdain, who are led to treat people poorly. Reflects the shifting social attitudes at the time

What are some criticisms of Fletcher’s situation ethics?

William Barclay criticises Fletcher’s theory:

• his examples are too focused on extraordinary moral deliberations. Morality must also focus on ordinary situations. Barclay notes that it is easier to agree that extraodinary situations need a type of situationism, but it is hard to imagine people in the modern world undergoing similar struggles as the subjects of his examples

• humans are given a ‘terrifying degree of freedom’. The flexibility might be counter-productive, in either people being paralysed by choice or given licence to always act from their own perception of love. This issue pervades all human actions in situation ethics.

  • SE places a great mental demand on human beings in taking away traditional forms of authority

  • and perhaps morality does work better when we do apply laws

Charlotte and Peter Vardy note that it is simply part of human nature to contain bias. It is hard to believe that adopting a widespread situationist perspective would not eventually lead to forms of abuse in the name of morality.

• if Fletcher’s ideas are adopted, there are widespread implications for religions. Many would argue that the emphasis on personal choice is open to error, and that Church organisation is necessary as an educational foundation for people. Fletcher’s critique of legalistic morality can be seen as undermining the Church’s authority on moral matters in giving a greater responsibility for people to interpret the message of Christ for themselves.

Situation ethics does not show why love should be the ultimate authority in many situations. Love cannot be accurately prescriptive as a moral theory.