Should Moral Decisions be based on Agape Alone?
Agape can be defined as unconditional Christian love. It is the word used most by Jesus in the
Bible in relation to love, and is often described as being selfless in nature. If we were to
accept agape as the best basis for making moral decisions, that would be to accept a highly
subjective - and religious- system to live by. Scholars such as Joseph Fletcher have
hypothesised on this very topic for decades, some arguing for, and some against this
statement. However, we will see that whilst in theory, doing the ‘most loving thing’ is an
attractive notion, agape as a concept is just too subjective to be able to reliably live by.
When considering the application of agape when making moral decisions, there is an
understanding that it is an inherently Christian principle, therefore, you must align yourself
with those beliefs in order to apply it in real life. As previously mentioned, agape is the word
used most by Jesus in the New Testament in terms of love. For those who follow Christianity
as a faith, this is a productive system to live by, as you would be living by what Bultmann
described as Jesus’ ‘singular ethic’ of ‘love thy neighbour’. However, for those who follow a
different religious faith, or no faith at all, this principle simply doesn’t apply. It doesn’t make
sense to base moral decisions solely on a principle which stems from a religion which you
don’t even follow. However, rather than placing focus on the religious aspects of Situation
Ethics as a whole, Fletcher places greater emphasis on the Kairos (the moment in time in
which a moral decision is made) and Sophia (meaning wisdom). Therefore, it is possible that
Fletcher would argue that rather than getting caught up on what may be argued to be the
religious aspects of the system, a more practical decision would be to focus on making the
decision that feels right in the moment- Kairos- using logic and reason -Sophia.
When it comes to deciding whether or not agape is the most reliable basis for moral decision
making, it is important to consider the possibility that it may be too abstract of a concept,
therefore is difficult to apply on a daily basis. Fletcher strongly believed in the notion that
moral decisions are best made when they have the ‘most loving thing’ in mind. Therefore, he
would subscribe to the idea that moral decisions should be based on agape alone. However,
when it comes to making moral decisions on a day-to-day basis, you are not guaranteed the
opportunity to consider all of the possibilities and deduce which action is the ‘most loving’.
In cases such as these, an absolute theory, such as Natural Law, may be a more appropriate
response. Thomas Aquinas would argue that basing moral decisions on a less subjective
Agape can be defined as unconditional Christian love. It is the word used most by Jesus in the
Bible in relation to love, and is often described as being selfless in nature. If we were to
accept agape as the best basis for making moral decisions, that would be to accept a highly
subjective - and religious- system to live by. Scholars such as Joseph Fletcher have
hypothesised on this very topic for decades, some arguing for, and some against this
statement. However, we will see that whilst in theory, doing the ‘most loving thing’ is an
attractive notion, agape as a concept is just too subjective to be able to reliably live by.
When considering the application of agape when making moral decisions, there is an
understanding that it is an inherently Christian principle, therefore, you must align yourself
with those beliefs in order to apply it in real life. As previously mentioned, agape is the word
used most by Jesus in the New Testament in terms of love. For those who follow Christianity
as a faith, this is a productive system to live by, as you would be living by what Bultmann
described as Jesus’ ‘singular ethic’ of ‘love thy neighbour’. However, for those who follow a
different religious faith, or no faith at all, this principle simply doesn’t apply. It doesn’t make
sense to base moral decisions solely on a principle which stems from a religion which you
don’t even follow. However, rather than placing focus on the religious aspects of Situation
Ethics as a whole, Fletcher places greater emphasis on the Kairos (the moment in time in
which a moral decision is made) and Sophia (meaning wisdom). Therefore, it is possible that
Fletcher would argue that rather than getting caught up on what may be argued to be the
religious aspects of the system, a more practical decision would be to focus on making the
decision that feels right in the moment- Kairos- using logic and reason -Sophia.
When it comes to deciding whether or not agape is the most reliable basis for moral decision
making, it is important to consider the possibility that it may be too abstract of a concept,
therefore is difficult to apply on a daily basis. Fletcher strongly believed in the notion that
moral decisions are best made when they have the ‘most loving thing’ in mind. Therefore, he
would subscribe to the idea that moral decisions should be based on agape alone. However,
when it comes to making moral decisions on a day-to-day basis, you are not guaranteed the
opportunity to consider all of the possibilities and deduce which action is the ‘most loving’.
In cases such as these, an absolute theory, such as Natural Law, may be a more appropriate
response. Thomas Aquinas would argue that basing moral decisions on a less subjective
