Tab 1
, ETHICS OVERVIEW
SITUATION ETHICS
Situation ethics is a teleological theory, as it is concerned with the outcome of an action (whether love is
served) rather than the ethics of the action itself.
A theory founded by Joseph Fletcher, who argued that in ethical decision making, love should be what is
morally served. This kind of love is known as “agape”, which is most clearly shown by Jesus.
A quote which demonstrates Fletcher’s ideas clearly is: “the situationist follows a moral law or violates it
according to love’s need”.
Fletcher had four working principles, which he said should be applied in ethical decision making:
1) Pragmatism → the focus of ethics should be what works
2) Relativism → absolute rules should not be applied
3) Positivism → faith & love should come before reasoning - we cannot look at the world and
discover moral law
4) Personalism → people should be at the centre of ethics - ‘love is of people, by people and for
people’.
Fletcher also used six propositions when making a complex ethical decision:
1) Love is the only intrinsically good thing
2) Love is the ruling norm of Christian decision making - Jesus summed up the Jewish law as ‘love
God’ and ‘Love your Neighbour’.
3) Justice is loved distributed - justice is Christian love applied rationally
4) Love wants what is good for everyone, willing the neighbour if we like them or not
5) The ends justify the means
6) Love decides on each situation as it arises, without a set of rules to guide it
These principles and propositions provide a framework for ethical decision making, but also aims to
maintain elements of individualism.
Fletcher saw conscience as the work of moral reasoning rather than a faculty in our head or a mysterious
inner voice.
There are case studies that can be applied when assessing the practicality of situation ethics:
,Mrs Bergmeier (Mrs B): She was arrested in World War Two for trying to hide Jews from the Nazis.
She committed an act of sacrificial adultery to become pregnant so that she could leave prison and
become united with her husband and family again.
Situation ethics would say that this action is morally acceptable, as love was best served in the end,
because she was united with her husband and family.
However, Situation ethics claims to be a Christian ethic, and in the Ten Commandments adultery is
forbidden. Therefore, is this action inherently wrong?
If she had performed this action, which had simply led to a positive outcome for her family by accident,
would it still be acceptable?
Tony Nicklinson: had locked-in syndrome. He requested to be euthanized, but was denied access.
Eventually, he starved himself to death.
A Situationist perhaps would say that the most loving thing to do would have been to allow him
euthanasia, to give him autonomy over his own body and to die with dignity.
However, if SE is a Christian ethic, there is the commandment stating “you shall not murder” - would this
make allowing euthanasia wrong? Is it too dangerous to apply a highly subjective ethic when dealing with
the questions of life or death?
Abortion rights - the Mother or the baby: Who has more rights, a Mother or a baby. Should a Mother
be allowed to abort her child?
A Situationist would say that if aborting the child is the most loving thing to do to it, then it is morally
viable. For example, if the child was going to be born with a condition which would make their quality of
life significantly low.
However, how can someone know what the most loving thing to do would be for someone who does not
even have the ability to make their own opinions?
MAIN STRENGTHS OF SITUATION ETHICS:
1) It plays attention to the unpredictable, changing nature of moral dilemmas rather than being
legalistic, dogmatic and inflexible.
2) Placing agape at the heart of ethics restores the spirit of the law that Jesus spoke of in the Sermon
on the Mount.
3) Practical and realistic
4) Understands the individualistic and subjective nature of moral decisions
5) Allows for a wide set of loving outcomes
, MAIN WEAKNESSES OF SITUATION ETHICS:
1) Contradictory to the foundation of ethics - sets out a long set of moral laws, and then states that
they are allowed to be ignored.
2) It is impossible to predict if truly the most loving outcome of an action will occur. What is love?
The definition itself is too subjective.
3) Are actions that are intrinsically and absolutely wrong allowed?
4) Philosopher McQuarrie suggests that it is too individualistic and subjective.
5) How can we know when a situation begins and ends? How far into the future should we be
calculating the outcome? To what extent are we morally responsible?
6) The author C.S. Lewis claims that there are four different descriptions for the idea of love: family
connection, close friendship, sexual love and unconditional love.
7) Humans cannot aspire to agapeic love, as we are sinful by nature.
8) The claim that ‘never’ and ‘always’ should be avoided emphasises that the theory has no clear
and absolute boundaries
There are questions as to if Fletcher’s understanding of agape is really religious. He claims that the only
valid approach to the bible is to follow its “general themes”, the most consistent one being agape.
Furthermore, Jesus states that the Greatest Commandment is “love thy neighbour as yourself”
However, does this loose application of the bible mean that Situation Ethics is a Christian ethic? Most
would say no, as SE allows for the disobedience of the Ten Commandments and other teachings by Jesus
due to how individualistic, non-dogmatic and subjective it is.
UTILITARIANISM
The holistic claim of utilitarianism is to maintain the Principle of Utility: to do the greatest good for the
greatest number.
Utilitarianism is a teleological ethic, as it is concerned with the outcome of an action rather than the
action itself. This means that if the consequence is morally acceptable, then the action is allowed.
It does not regard the teachings of religion to be of relevance, therefore, it is a secular ethic. It does not
follow any kind of moral rules.
There are three kinds of utilitarianism: Act, Rule and Preference (however, this one is extra knowledge).
Jeremy Bentham: founded act utilitarianism. This holds the belief that the Principle of Utility should be
applied in every situation. He claims that a part of our human nature is to seek pleasure and to avoid pain
- which comes from our psychology (not God) → ‘nature has placed mankind under the sovereignty of
two masters - pleasure and pain’.
, ETHICS OVERVIEW
SITUATION ETHICS
Situation ethics is a teleological theory, as it is concerned with the outcome of an action (whether love is
served) rather than the ethics of the action itself.
A theory founded by Joseph Fletcher, who argued that in ethical decision making, love should be what is
morally served. This kind of love is known as “agape”, which is most clearly shown by Jesus.
A quote which demonstrates Fletcher’s ideas clearly is: “the situationist follows a moral law or violates it
according to love’s need”.
Fletcher had four working principles, which he said should be applied in ethical decision making:
1) Pragmatism → the focus of ethics should be what works
2) Relativism → absolute rules should not be applied
3) Positivism → faith & love should come before reasoning - we cannot look at the world and
discover moral law
4) Personalism → people should be at the centre of ethics - ‘love is of people, by people and for
people’.
Fletcher also used six propositions when making a complex ethical decision:
1) Love is the only intrinsically good thing
2) Love is the ruling norm of Christian decision making - Jesus summed up the Jewish law as ‘love
God’ and ‘Love your Neighbour’.
3) Justice is loved distributed - justice is Christian love applied rationally
4) Love wants what is good for everyone, willing the neighbour if we like them or not
5) The ends justify the means
6) Love decides on each situation as it arises, without a set of rules to guide it
These principles and propositions provide a framework for ethical decision making, but also aims to
maintain elements of individualism.
Fletcher saw conscience as the work of moral reasoning rather than a faculty in our head or a mysterious
inner voice.
There are case studies that can be applied when assessing the practicality of situation ethics:
,Mrs Bergmeier (Mrs B): She was arrested in World War Two for trying to hide Jews from the Nazis.
She committed an act of sacrificial adultery to become pregnant so that she could leave prison and
become united with her husband and family again.
Situation ethics would say that this action is morally acceptable, as love was best served in the end,
because she was united with her husband and family.
However, Situation ethics claims to be a Christian ethic, and in the Ten Commandments adultery is
forbidden. Therefore, is this action inherently wrong?
If she had performed this action, which had simply led to a positive outcome for her family by accident,
would it still be acceptable?
Tony Nicklinson: had locked-in syndrome. He requested to be euthanized, but was denied access.
Eventually, he starved himself to death.
A Situationist perhaps would say that the most loving thing to do would have been to allow him
euthanasia, to give him autonomy over his own body and to die with dignity.
However, if SE is a Christian ethic, there is the commandment stating “you shall not murder” - would this
make allowing euthanasia wrong? Is it too dangerous to apply a highly subjective ethic when dealing with
the questions of life or death?
Abortion rights - the Mother or the baby: Who has more rights, a Mother or a baby. Should a Mother
be allowed to abort her child?
A Situationist would say that if aborting the child is the most loving thing to do to it, then it is morally
viable. For example, if the child was going to be born with a condition which would make their quality of
life significantly low.
However, how can someone know what the most loving thing to do would be for someone who does not
even have the ability to make their own opinions?
MAIN STRENGTHS OF SITUATION ETHICS:
1) It plays attention to the unpredictable, changing nature of moral dilemmas rather than being
legalistic, dogmatic and inflexible.
2) Placing agape at the heart of ethics restores the spirit of the law that Jesus spoke of in the Sermon
on the Mount.
3) Practical and realistic
4) Understands the individualistic and subjective nature of moral decisions
5) Allows for a wide set of loving outcomes
, MAIN WEAKNESSES OF SITUATION ETHICS:
1) Contradictory to the foundation of ethics - sets out a long set of moral laws, and then states that
they are allowed to be ignored.
2) It is impossible to predict if truly the most loving outcome of an action will occur. What is love?
The definition itself is too subjective.
3) Are actions that are intrinsically and absolutely wrong allowed?
4) Philosopher McQuarrie suggests that it is too individualistic and subjective.
5) How can we know when a situation begins and ends? How far into the future should we be
calculating the outcome? To what extent are we morally responsible?
6) The author C.S. Lewis claims that there are four different descriptions for the idea of love: family
connection, close friendship, sexual love and unconditional love.
7) Humans cannot aspire to agapeic love, as we are sinful by nature.
8) The claim that ‘never’ and ‘always’ should be avoided emphasises that the theory has no clear
and absolute boundaries
There are questions as to if Fletcher’s understanding of agape is really religious. He claims that the only
valid approach to the bible is to follow its “general themes”, the most consistent one being agape.
Furthermore, Jesus states that the Greatest Commandment is “love thy neighbour as yourself”
However, does this loose application of the bible mean that Situation Ethics is a Christian ethic? Most
would say no, as SE allows for the disobedience of the Ten Commandments and other teachings by Jesus
due to how individualistic, non-dogmatic and subjective it is.
UTILITARIANISM
The holistic claim of utilitarianism is to maintain the Principle of Utility: to do the greatest good for the
greatest number.
Utilitarianism is a teleological ethic, as it is concerned with the outcome of an action rather than the
action itself. This means that if the consequence is morally acceptable, then the action is allowed.
It does not regard the teachings of religion to be of relevance, therefore, it is a secular ethic. It does not
follow any kind of moral rules.
There are three kinds of utilitarianism: Act, Rule and Preference (however, this one is extra knowledge).
Jeremy Bentham: founded act utilitarianism. This holds the belief that the Principle of Utility should be
applied in every situation. He claims that a part of our human nature is to seek pleasure and to avoid pain
- which comes from our psychology (not God) → ‘nature has placed mankind under the sovereignty of
two masters - pleasure and pain’.
