philo - situation ethics

CONTEXT of situation ethics

1960s USA Robinson and Fletcher

• new way of ethics relating to modern culture whilst upholdingchristian moral values

• TELEOLOGICAL

PRE WORLD WAR MORALITY

• heavily christian - women homemakers and men worked

60s

• less emphasis on religion

• freedom,youth, love, acceptance

• less conservative

• feminism, homosexuality and civil rights movements growing in popularity

SOCIAL CHANGE

• civil rights - more equality, less segregation

• feminism - push for male and female equality, not set in traditional roles, women in work

• changing attitudes towards drugs - changing moral standards, engaging in party culture

• changing attitudes towards morality

• changing attitudes towards sex - contraception

OVERALL - society became more liberal and permissive

FLETCHER AND ROBINSON

acknowledged societal changes and sought an ethical solution which would bring people back towards christian morals, but without the gloom and doom, and strict rules associated with religion

‘the morality of an action depends on the situation’ fletcher

where does situation ethics sit on a scale?

CHRISTIAN LEGALISM - strict rules e.g. nml

SITUATION ETHICS - decide what to do in each situation

ANARCHISM - no rules

what PRINCIPLE is SE based on

DO THE MOST LOVING THING

nothing is always right or wrong - SITUATIONAL

‘no moral absolutes’

morality understood by considering consequences and thinking about whether consequences are loving - teleology

examples of JESUS SHOWING AGAPE LOVE

forgave debts of 2 people no matter the amount of debt when others are wary

jesus ate with sinners and tax collectors - help those in need rather than judge them ‘it is not the healthy that need a doctor but the sick’

healed man on sabbath despite dangers of being killed

what is AGAPE LOVE

unconditional love defined in the bible

JESUS showed this by breaking deontological social rules as his actions were more important than the law

6 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES

created by fletcher to prevent subjectivity around moral behaviour

1- love is always good

2- love is the only norm

3- love and justice are the same, and love is justice redistributed

4- love wills the neighbour’s good, whether we like him or not

5- love is the only means

6- love decides there and then

1 - LOVE ONLY IS ALWAYS GOOD

• actions only good if help humans and bad if they hurt others

• most loving thing never causes a human physical/ emotional pain

• immoral if brings about physical pain

2- LOVE IS THE ONLY NORM

• acceptable to sometimes break existing rules to allow the most loving thing

• relies on biblical evidence

• ‘love thy neighbour’

3- LOVE ANS JUSTICE ARE THE SAME, AND LOVE IS JUSTICE REDISTRIBUTED

• love and justice cannot be separated, showing love means to show justice to everyone involved in an ethical dilemma

• sometimes only loving if fair

• when most loving action is done, what is fair for everyone is done - action must respect human rights and freedom

4- LOVE WILLS THE NEIGHBOUR’S GOOD, WHETHER WE LIKE HIM OR NOT

• your neighbour is anybody and agape love goes to everyone

• action good when uses agape love only, not based on whether we like a person (friendship etc) but how jesus wanted

• parable of good samaritan - standard

5 - LOVE IS THE ONLY MEANS

• when weighing up a situation, must consider what wnt to outcome to be and how you get there, fletcher said must be most loving

• result of action must reflect most loving outcome for all

• love = only way to reach loving conc. no other p/n emotion can get in way of decision making e.g. selfishness

6 - LOVE DECIDES THERE AND THEN

• right/ wrong decision depends on situation and cannot be pre-determined

• no morally absolute rules

• cannot understand most loving thing until in situation

4 working principles

PRAGMATISM

RELATIVISM

POSITIVISM

PERSONALISM

4 working principles

PRAGMATISM

something that works to maximise love and its value

no value = no point

4 working principles

RELATIVISM

everything is relative to the situation

e.g. in christianity - situation is agape love, meaning that laws such as ‘do not commit adultery’ may be broken in order to maximise love

4 working principles

POSITIVISM

ethical norms are not rational, they are held as an act of judgement and of faith

choice to belive ‘god is love’, faith must come first

do not understand god in terms of love, but rather love in terms of god

4 working principles

PERSONALISM

people put at the centre of concern, not things

people are to be loved, not rules

real existence lives in personal existence

emphasised whe god became flesh

situation ethics to animal life and death

ANIMALS FOR FOOD/ INTENSIVE FARMING

love is only means - not most loving thing

natural to eat animals

not loving - starvation for humans as animals eat grain

cheaper - helps poor

not loving

situation ethics to animal life and death

USING ANIMALS FOR SCIENTIFIC PROCEDURES; CLONING

fletcher involved in cloning research - allowed it

practical, efficient, agapeic

end justifies means

not loving to treat animals this way

situation ethics to animal life and death

BLOOD SPORTS

love is always good - unacceptable as harms others

against love and justice princip

human interests shouldnt be at pain of animals

damage human character

most loving thing - foxes damage livestock

SE to life and death

animals for ORGAN TRANSPLANTS

personalism - human life in centre so acceptable

for some, animals dont qualify as persons

depends on who is helped

take into account risks

good outweighing bad

may pursue other methods of organ donation

SE and CATHOLIC CRITICISM

POPE PIUS XII

• too SUBJECTIVE b/c decisions made from within the situation as it is perceived to be

• could prove UNWORKABLE as cannot determine all consequences

• INDIVIDUALISTIC as humans see from own perspective - how many people can show actual equal love?

• seems to be prepared to ACCEPT ANY CONSEQUENCE if fits criteria

S/W of SE

STRENGTHS

• clear form of christian ethics that works with the modern day as it is consistent to jesus represented in gospels - may be more in line with jesus’ teachings than following all rules in bible

• more modern approach evolving through societal changes

• flexible and practical - takes into account complex human life and making tough decisions, when, from a legalistic stance, all actions seem wrong - empathy, willpower, consider all options to choose most loving

• easy to understand as only follow a single princip (most loving)

• dont have to follow conventional rule which might bring about unloving consequences, as can focus on what is appropriate in the situation (relativism)

• based on love, which rationally, and emotionally, is a key feature of all moral systems - we know that love is good (positivism)

• puts humans first (personalism)

WEAKNESSES

• subjective - dont always have the fact to make a sound decision

• individualistic - most loving to one is not to another

• prepared to accept any action as long as the outcome is loving

• inconsistent with some teachings in bible - gives deontological rules that fletcher ignore

• how often do we face extreme cases where it is obvious what the most loving thing is? people need to be practical and fletchers illustrations arent relevant for most

• people need laws and rules to spell out behaviour in order to keep us all safe and doing same thing

• people would mean to do most loving thing but personal preferences and wants get in way

• in reality is impossible to predict future so never truly know what consequences wll be before we act

SCRIPTURAL CRITICISMS/ STRENGTHS

S - ROMANS the commandments do not commit adultery… kill…. steal…. are summed up in ….. love thy neighbour as oneself’

• love is fulfillment of law

• importance of deontology

W - BARCLAY

fletchers examples too extreme

only life or death situations and not applicable to daily life

too vague: humanity has ‘terrible freedom’

• this made robinson DENOUNCE SUPPORT