C.11 Situation ethics

Who's associated w Sit ethics

What did they believe?

What is situation ethics?

• Associated w ethicist Joseph Fletcher,

• Belived he was following logic of other writers e.g Aristotle in 'Nicomachean ethics' explains right judgement requires that we pay attention to circumstance

• Sit ethics is a view that there is a single absolute principle of love to be applied in each situation to produce the best outcome

- Fletcher and William Temple

- Reference to Aquinas allowing flexibility in extreme situations

- Fletcher deeply studied though of Temple who's ethic was love centred:

• "There is only one invariable duty and its formula is 'Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself"

• Temples interpretation was situational: "What acts are right may depend on circumstances"

- A starving man should steal a loaf rather than die of hunger as life holds more value than property

Fletcher quote on sit ethics

What is Situation ethics NOT

- "There is only one thing that is always good and right, intrinsically good regardless of the context, and that one thing is love..." ; expresses the central principle of Situation Ethics — agape love (unconditional, Christian love) as the only intrinsic good.

- Situation Ethics is not arguing for the METAETHICAL theory of relativism. Even though it is contextual, it still holds one absolute principle (love) though, critics may accuse Situation Ethics of being morally relativistic

Fletcher and temple on Personalism

Personalism: the idea that people comes first over laws

Temple and Fletcher uphold personalism

Fletcher believed laws should help people not control them

What are the three approaches for to moral life according to Fletcher:

Legalism: believes there are fixed moral rules which are universal

Antinomianism: view that rules and principles should be rejected

Situationism: believed absolutely in the rule of love that is applied situationally

What are the FOUR working principles

Pragmatism: we must seek practical solutions

Relativism: Fletcher argues whatever we do must be related to both facts about ourselves and what we are able to do and the facts of the situation

Positivism: belief that a God of Love (for non Christian's a higher good) is posited then supported by logic, as we have this belief in supremacy of love we must reason what supports that love in each situation

Personalism: requires placing people at center of all our moral considerations

The six propositions (3/6)

The 4 working principles support the 6 propositions which would be followed in all our judgments of what to do:

1 Only love is intrinsically good.

(Love is the only thing that's always good.)

2 Love is the ruling norm of Christian ethics.

(Love replaces laws — like "do not steal" — if love demands it.)

3 "love and justice are the same, for justice is love distributed, nothing else"

The six propositions (the rest so 6/6)

4 Love wills the neighbour's good.

(Love is selfless — it wants the best for others.)

5 Only the end justifies the means — if it brings about love.

(If the result is loving, then the action is right, shows sit ethics is teleological.)

6 Love's decisions are made case by case.

(There are no fixed rules — only loving responses to each situation.)

Faith and sit ethics

" 'You shall love your neighbour as yourself.' There is no other commandment greater than these" - Mark 12:29-31

When Fletcher gave up his Christianity he stated that Christian's would equate the good with agape (altruistic/ selfless love) while non- Christian will find other accounts e.g Aristotle's flourishing

Fletcher on conscience

- F states, "Conscience is merely a word for our attempts to make decisions creatively, constructively, fittingly."

- doesn't treat conscience as a "thing" inside you (a noun), but as the action you take when faced with a moral choice in sit ethics your conscience is you applying agape love

Criticisms of Situation ethics

- doesn't define what constitutes a 'situation' is it the particular circumstance or the future e.g you save a person as it's the loving, selfless thing to do however that person commits genocide in the future is the act that was initially loving now seen as unloving?

- Love" can be defined differently by different people, lacks objective benchmark; opens the door to conflicting judgments

- Critics argue it can justify almost any action if someone claims it's "loving" (e.g. lying, even killing).

- Always requiring the "most loving" choice may be practically impossible in complex situations.

- Rooted in Christian theology, less persuasive for secular ethicists or those of other faiths; however Fletcher when an atheist redefined agape in non-sectarian terms, he ensured Situation Ethics could be applied by anyone

Strengths of situation ethics

+ flexibility regarding situations

+ Puts selfless, unconditional love at the centre of ethics something intuitive and positive.

+ upholds personalism; respects humans and their dignity over laws

+ Rejects legalism (which can be cold and inflexible) and antinomianism (which can be chaotic) keeps one absolute norm: LOVE

+ Sees conscience as an active verb; encouraging moral maturity as you learn to judge situations

+ builds on Jesus teachings appealing to Christian ethicists