Situation Ethics

The New Morality

Two Different Ways of Doing Ethics
 Deontological: Actions are right or wrong
in themselves. Kant believed in this
approach (The Categorical Imperative)

 Teleological: Actions are judged right or

wrong by examining their results or ‘ends’
(‘Teleos’ is the Greek word for ends)
Sometimes this is known as
‘Consequentialism’.
Two Different Ways of Doing Ethics

 Relativism: What is right or wrong

depends on the circumstances. It might
vary according to history, culture, or the
personal circumstances of the situation
(hence Situation Ethics).
 Absolutism: Things are right or wrong. If
something is wrong in one situation, then it
is wrong for all other situations.
Strengths of Situation Ethics

 Many would welcome the flexibility of

Situation Ethics. It seems less rigid than
other ethical theories.
 It requires very little (if any) theological
assumptions – it in some ways suits our
multicultural, multi-faith age.
 It is practical. It does not too demanding
on those who would follow it.
Weaknesses of Situation Ethics
 It is not easy to determine all the
consequences of an action.
 There’s a danger that the ideals of
unconditional love may be polluted by a
selfish human tendency.
 It seems at least possible that Situation
Ethics could be used to justify all kinds of
actions that are simply inexcusable.
Genocide, child abuse?
Exam Question

 (a) How might a Situation Ethicist respond

to the claim that people should always tell
 the truth? [33]
 (b) Assess the strengths and weaknesses
of Situation ethics. [17]
 You will have 30 minutes to answer this
question in the January exam. Deadline
16/10/06 (Next Monday)