Situation ethics.
AO1 – Knowledge (15 Prompts)
How does Situation Ethics use agape to make moral decisions?
Who developed Situation Ethics and what inspired it?
How does Situationism differ from Legalism?
How does Situationism differ from Antinomianism?
Why does Situation Ethics prioritise context over fixed rules?
How does Fletcher describe conscience as a verb?
How does Aquinas distinguish between synderesis and conscientia?
What does Fletcher mean by “love is the only universal”?
How is Jesus’ behaviour used to illustrate agape in Situation Ethics?
How does Fletcher define agape and its link to reason?
What are Fletcher’s 6 Fundamental Propositions about love and moral rules?
How does pragmatism operate in Situation Ethics?
How does relativism explain the morality of actions?
What does positivism add to Fletcher’s approach?
How does personalism shift the focus in moral decision-making?
AO2 – Evaluation (15 Prompts)
Why is Situation Ethics considered flexible compared to Legalism?
How does Situation Ethics allow for relativism in moral decisions?
How does Situation Ethics provide practical guidance through pragmatism?
Why do critics argue Situation Ethics is too vague or subjective?
How might human imperfection limit the reliability of Situation Ethics?
What are the concerns about Fletcher’s extreme examples (e.g., Hiroshima, smothering baby)?
How is Situation Ethics a Christian ethical approach?
How might Situation Ethics conflict with modern Christianity or legalistic ethics?
Why might following only agape be considered insufficient by traditional thinkers?
How does rejecting absolute rules risk individualism in moral decisions?
How does Fletcher argue against moral individualism in his 4 presumptions?
How does agape act as “quality control” in moral decisions?
How does Situation Ethics balance between Legalism and Antinomianism?
Why do critics argue Situation Ethics could justify immoral actions in the name of love?
How do Jesus’ actions show that love and justice are aligned in Situation Ethics?
AO1 – Knowledge
Situation Ethics judges each situation individually, guided by the principle of love (agape), inspired by Jesus’ teaching to “love thy neighbour as thyself” and Rudolf Bultmann’s emphasis on Jesus’ ethical message.
Situationism differs from Legalism (fixed rules) and Antinomianism (rejecting all laws) by applying agape in context as a middle ground.
It prioritises context because right and wrong depend on the situation; universal laws don’t always work.
Conscience is a verb, a creative process of weighing options to act most lovingly; it’s not intuition or divine guidance.
Synderesis is the habitual use of right reason to know moral principles; conscientia is the application of these principles; together they form conscience.
“Love is the only universal” means agape is always good; Jesus’ actions show love can override rules, e.g., healing on the Sabbath.
Agape is selfless, unconditional love aimed at the neighbour’s good; Jesus’ death exemplifies ultimate self-sacrifice.
Love is the only intrinsically good thing, replaces all laws, and aligns with justice.
Love wills the neighbour’s good, the end justifies the means, and love decides in each situation, not rules.
Pragmatism focuses on practical action to achieve the greatest love, illustrated by the smothering-baby example.
Relativism holds that actions are right or wrong depending on the situation and what produces the most loving result.
Positivism links belief in God with commitment to act in the most loving way.
Personalism prioritises people over rules, asking “Who needs help?” and treating humans as ends, not means.
Situation Ethics is flexible, guided by agape, considers life’s complexities, and applies principles practically, e.g., pragmatism and relativism.
Fletcher sees Situation Ethics as a Christian approach grounded in the Bible and Jesus’ actions, showing love can override rules when necessary.
AO2 – Evaluation
It’s helpful because it allows moral flexibility and freedom that Legalism lacks.
Relativism prevents rigid rules from limiting moral decision-making.
Pragmatism makes it practical; the morally right action is what achieves the most love in context.
Critics argue it’s vague, subjective, and unclear how to determine the “most loving” action.
Human imperfection limits reliability; people may misapply agape due to corruption or flawed judgement.
Extreme examples like Hiroshima or smothering a baby are unrealistic and weaken the claim of practicality.
It’s religious because it builds on Jesus’ Golden Rule and the emphasis on love in Scripture.
It may conflict with legalistic or traditional Christianity, which prioritises fixed rules or sanctity of life.
Following only agape may be insufficient for guidance; multiple authorities (Bible, tradition, Natural Law) are valued by the Church.
Rejection of absolute rules risks individualistic or selfish decision-making.
Fletcher argues laws grounded in agape prevent extremes and provide ethical guidance.
Agape acts as “quality control” via Fletcher’s 4 presumptions to ensure practical, loving outcomes.
Situation Ethics balances Legalism and Antinomianism; it follows rules flexibly rather than rigidly.
Critics argue the “end justifies the means” could justify immoral acts if claimed to be loving.
Jesus’ actions show love and justice are aligned; love guides moral decisions without overriding ethical integrity.AO1 – Knowledge
Situation Ethics judges each situation individually, guided by the principle of love (agape), inspired by Jesus’ teaching to “love thy neighbour as thyself” and Rudolf Bultmann’s emphasis on Jesus’ ethical message.
Situationism differs from Legalism (fixed rules) and Antinomianism (rejecting all laws) by applying agape in context as a middle ground.
It prioritises context because right and wrong depend on the situation; universal laws don’t always work.
Conscience is a verb, a creative process of weighing options to act most lovingly; it’s not intuition or divine guidance.
Synderesis is the habitual use of right reason to know moral principles; conscientia is the application of these principles; together they form conscience.
“Love is the only universal” means agape is always good; Jesus’ actions show love can override rules, e.g., healing on the Sabbath.
Agape is selfless, unconditional love aimed at the neighbour’s good; Jesus’ death exemplifies ultimate self-sacrifice.
Love is the only intrinsically good thing, replaces all laws, and aligns with justice.
Love wills the neighbour’s good, the end justifies the means, and love decides in each situation, not rules.
Pragmatism focuses on practical action to achieve the greatest love, illustrated by the smothering-baby example.
Relativism holds that actions are right or wrong depending on the situation and what produces the most loving result.
Positivism links belief in God with commitment to act in the most loving way.
Personalism prioritises people over rules, asking “Who needs help?” and treating humans as ends, not means.
Situation Ethics is flexible, guided by agape, considers life’s complexities, and applies principles practically, e.g., pragmatism and relativism.
Fletcher sees Situation Ethics as a Christian approach grounded in the Bible and Jesus’ actions, showing love can override rules when necessary.
AO2 – Evaluation
It’s helpful because it allows moral flexibility and freedom that Legalism lacks.
Relativism prevents rigid rules from limiting moral decision-making.
Pragmatism makes it practical; the morally right action is what achieves the most love in context.
Critics argue it’s vague, subjective, and unclear how to determine the “most loving” action.
Human imperfection limits reliability; people may misapply agape due to corruption or flawed judgement.
Extreme examples like Hiroshima or smothering a baby are unrealistic and weaken the claim of practicality.
It’s religious because it builds on Jesus’ Golden Rule and the emphasis on love in Scripture.
It may conflict with legalistic or traditional Christianity, which prioritises fixed rules or sanctity of life.
Following only agape may be insufficient for guidance; multiple authorities (Bible, tradition, Natural Law) are valued by the Church.
Rejection of absolute rules risks individualistic or selfish decision-making.
Fletcher argues laws grounded in agape prevent extremes and provide ethical guidance.
Agape acts as “quality control” via Fletcher’s 4 presumptions to ensure practical, loving outcomes.
Situation Ethics balances Legalism and Antinomianism; it follows rules flexibly rather than rigidly.
Critics argue the “end justifies the means” could justify immoral acts if claimed to be loving.
Jesus’ actions show love and justice are aligned; love guides moral decisions without overriding ethical integrity.