Situation Ethics

Kamil, Maya, Rukhaiya

What is it?
• Most ethical approaches are deductive. They have fixed
rules which are applied to the circumstances.

• Situation Ethics is inductive. It begins with looking at the

circumstance and then it applies general principles in order
to work out what is right for the particular situation.

• This is known as casuistry. (ca-zhu-es-tree)

• Situation Ethics is a teleological theory.

The Christian Approach

• "There is only one ultimate and invariable duty, and its

formula is 'Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.' How
to do this is another question, but this is the whole of
moral duty." - William Temple (1923)

•  "The law of love is the ultimate law because it is the

negation of law; it is absolute because it concerns
everything concrete. ... The absolutism of love is its
power to go into the concrete situation, to discover what
is demanded by the predicament of the concrete to which
it turns. Therefore, love can never become fanatical in a
fight for the absolute, or cynical under the impact of the
relative." - Tillich (1951)
Joseph Fletcher 

• Situational Ethics was pioneered by

him (1905-1991). 
• Founded the modern situational
ethics movement. 
• Fletcher was an Episcopal priest, a
member of the Euthanasia
Educational Counsel, and an
advocate for Planned Parenthood. 
• He was a supporter of both
euthanasia and abortion.
Fletcher's model 
• Fletcher's model states that decision-making should be
based upon the circumstances of a particular situation,
and not upon fixed Law. 
• The only absolute is Love. 
• Love should be the motive behind every decision. 
• As long as Love is your intention, the end justifies the
means.
•  Justice is not in the letter of the Law, it is in the
distribution of Love.
• Founded his model upon a statement found in the New
Testament of the Bible, "God is Love" (I John 4:8).
The 'Contradiction' 
• Situational Ethics is based upon "God is Love" in I John
4:8. However, in the very next chapter we read, "This
is the love of God, that we keep His commandments.
And His commandments are not burdensome" (I John
5:3). 
• While Fletcher holds that any commandment may be
broken in good conscience if Love is one's intention,
the Bible states that the keeping ofGod's
commandments is loving God. 
• To break any commandment, regardless of your
intentions, is to not love God. 
• Therefore, logic holds that the breaking of the
commandment was not done in Love.
God's Word 
• Wrong
• It is best not to transgress God's Law under any circumstance,
regardless of your motive. 
• God knows best and instituted His Law for a purpose. 
• He has not given permission to any man to transgress His Law. 
o If you will suffer because of keeping His Law, rejoice and be
exceedingly glad, for so the Prophets suffered before you, and
great is your reward in Heaven. If you can save a loved one
from suffering by breaking God's Law, do not.
o  For you are taking away their opportunity to persevere and
receive blessings from God. Furthermore, you are breaking
God's Law, bringing His displeasure upon yourself. 
Strengths
It's personal
• It is sensitive to circumstances, context, particularity, and cultural
traditions.
•  Every moral decision is required to demonstrate respect for individuals and
communities and the things that they regard as valuable.
• Avoids the logical, detached, impersonal ways of thinking.

It's particular
• Because moral decisions are treated on a case-by-case basis, the decision is
always tailored to particular situations.

It's based on doing good

• Teaches people that right acts are those motivated by the wish to
promote the well-being of people.
Weaknesses
It excludes most universal moral truths
• By doing this it seems to remove any possibility of guaranteeing universal
human rights, and satisfying human needs for a useful ethical framework for
human behaviour.

It does not provide a clear cut definition of 'love'

• Love is not defined and therefore can be interpreted in any way.

It may approve of 'evil acts'

• Teaches that particular types of action don't have an inherent moral value -
whether they are good or bad depends on the eventual result.
• This means that it permits a person to carry out acts that are generally
regarded as bad, such as killing and lying, if those acts lead to a sufficiently
good result.