Download
1 / 11
150 likes | 395 Views
Situation Ethics. ‘The New Morality’. Basic Details. A relativist, consequentialist theory. It does not prescribe fixed rules; it considers the outcomes of actions. First developed by Joseph Fletcher in Situation Ethics (1963).
E N D
Situation Ethics ‘The New Morality’
Basic Details • A relativist, consequentialist theory. It does not prescribe fixed rules; it considers the outcomes of actions. • First developed by Joseph Fletcher in Situation Ethics (1963). • Inspired by Jesus’ gospel message of love (agape). Fletcher appealed to the biblical scholar Rudolf Bultmann, according to whom Jesus taught no ethics other than “love thy neighbour as thyself”.
“The morality of an action depends upon the situation” Rudolf Bultmann: Jesus didn’t teach a system of ethics, only “love thy neighbour” Joseph Fletcher Inspired by the Bible, but not absolutist
Other ethical approaches • Fletcher distinguished Situation Ethics from two common approaches to ethics: legalism and anti-nomianism (nomos=law). • Legalists enforce fixed rules and rigid morality. • Anti-nomians shun laws and live without moral restraints. • According to Fletcher, his theory avoided the pitfalls of both, being more flexible than legalism and more principled than anti-nomianism.
Four Working Principles • Fletcher stated that there are four basic ‘working principles’ to Situation Ethics: • Pragmatism – moral actions must work or achieve some realistic goal. • Relativism – there are no fixed laws which must always be obeyed. • Positivism – first place is given to Christian love, rooted in faith. Belief precedes action. • Personalism – people come first, not rules or ideals.
Six Fundamental Principles There are also six ‘fundamental principles’: • Only one thing is intrinsically good: love. • The ruling norm of Christian decision is love. • Love and justice are the same. • Love wills the neighbour’s good, whether we like him or not. • Only the end justifies the means, nothing else. • Love’s decisions are made situationally, not prescriptively.
Also during the 1960’s, Bishop John Robinson was developing similar views to Fletcher. He was supportive of Situation Ethics and himself wrote: “Assertions about God are in the last analysis assertions about love” Robinson thought that love was at the core of what it meant to be Christian, rather than inflexible absolute moral rules.
Strengths of Situation Ethics • Christian system – consistent with the teaching of Jesus eg Good Samaritan “go, and do likewise”. • Flexible relativist system – in enables people to make tough decisions. • It emphasises love (agape) – surely everyone agrees that’s a good thing. • It avoids conflicts of duty, as one experiences in absolute systems. Where moral rules collide, Situation Ethics gives a way of resolving the conflict: love.
Weaknesses of Situation Ethics • Christian system – atheists and those of other faiths might not want to follow the example of Jesus. Agape is a very high standard. • Relativist system – it could allow for almost any action. • ‘Love’ is very subjective. People naturally will disagree about what loving behaviour is. • It is difficult to predict the future results of actions – making consequentialist decisions based on love is unreliable.
Bernard Hoose - Proportionalism • Hoose attempted to modify Fletcher’s theory by combining it with elements of Natural Moral law. He called the resulting theory ‘Proportionalism’. • Hoose gave the maxim: “It is never right to go against a principle unless there is a • proportionate reason to justify it.”
Exam questions: Religious = Christian • AS: a) Explain how religious ethics helps resolve issues around abortion. • It looks difficult, but is actually very easy. • Situation ethics is a religious system (remember Jesus and agape), so it is bound together with the issue of religion and morality. It is Christian relativism, whereas Natural Law and Divine Command are absolute systems of ethics.
