Situation Ethics

Situationist

Fletcher quoted a St Louis cab driver who said “Sometimes you’ve gotta put your principles to one side and do
the right thing”. Rules (or principles) aren’t the same thing as doing what is right.

Some ethical theories suggest legalistic rules that mustn’t be broken, This is wrong as it makes rules more
important than people, and doesn’t allow exceptions. There are antinomians who reject rules entirely. This is
wrong as it leads to complete chaos with no laws at all, and no way of choosing between two courses of
action. The situationist has respect for the laws, may often follow the laws and be informed by tradition.
However, he is free to make the right choice according to the situation.

Best Interests

Agape - "... goodwill at work in partnership with reason" in seeking the "neighbour's best interest with a careful
eye to all the factors in the situation". Agape is concern for others. Fletcher uses the term ‘best interest’, so this
seems much the same as Singer’s utilitarianism. We act out of love for others, trying to do the best to serve
their interests.

The Four Working Principles

Pragmatism

For a course of action to be right, it has to be practical. It must work. For example, in the case of Jodie and
Mary, conjoined twins, the Catholic church wanted to let both of the girls die. To kill one, saving the other,
would be an evil or bad act, they said. Fletcher would have disagreed. Letting both girls die is not pragmatic. It
would be of more use, more practical, to save one girl at the expense of the other. Whilst this is not
consequentialist - it is love that is good, not an outcome - in practice it makes Fletcher's theory very similar
indeed to Singer's utilitarianism.

Relativism

‘It relativizes the absolute, it does not absolutize the relative’.

This means that rules (absolutes) don’t always apply, they depend on the situation. Absolutes like ‘Do not
steal’ become relative to love – if love demands stealing food for the hungry, you steal. However, it doesn’t
mean ‘anything goes’. He doesn’t take a relative ‘Do whatever the situation demands’ and make it into an
absolute [read the quote above again to check you understand this]

Positivism

Kant and Natural Law are based on reason – reason can uncover the right course of action. Situation Ethics
disagrees, You have to start with a positive choice – you need to want to do good. There is no rational answer
to the question “Why should I love?”

Personalism

Situation Ethics puts people first. People are more important than rules. “Man was not made for the Sabbath”.
Six Fundamental Principles

 Love only is always good Love is intrinsically valuable, it has inherent

worth. Love is good. Nothing else has intrinsic
‘Only one ‘thing’ is intrinsically good; value but ‘it gains or acquires its value only
namely, love: nothing else at all’ because it happens to help persons (thus being
good) or to hurt persons (thus being bad)’. A lie is
not intrinsically wrong. It is wrong if it harms
people, but may sometimes be right. ‘For the
Situationist, what makes the lie right is its loving
purpose; [they are] not hypnotised by some
abstract law, ‘Thou shalt not lie’.’
 Love is the only norm (rule) Love replaces the law. The law should only be
obeyed in the interests of love, not for the law’s
‘The ruling norm of Christian sake! Fletcher rejects Natural Law. He says
decision is love: nothing else’ ‘There are no [natural] universal laws held by all
men everywhere at all times.’ Jesus summarized
the entire law by saying ‘Love God’ and ‘Love
your neighbour’. Love is the only law. The
problem with this is that it allows the individual to
do anything in the name of love – there are no
rules to say that someone has done the wrong
thing.
 Love and justice are the same There can be no love without justice. Consider
any injustice – a child starving, a man arrested
"Love and justice are the same, for without charge etc. These are examples of a lack
justice is love distributed, nothing of love. If love was properly shared out, there
else." would be no injustice.
 Love is not liking Love is discerning and critical, not sentimental.
Martin Luther King described Agape love as a
"Love wills the neighbor’s good ‘creative, redemptive goodwill to all men’. He said
whether we like him or not." it would be nonsense to ask people to like their
violent oppressors. Christian love is a non-selfish
love of all people.
 Love justifies the means When someone said to Fletcher ‘The end doesn’t
justify the means’, he said ‘Then what on earth
"Only the end justifies the means; does?’. If an action causes harm, it is wrong. If
nothing else," good comes of it, it is right. Fletcher says you
can’t claim to be right by following a rule (like ‘Do
not lie’) knowing it will cause great harm. Only the
end or outcome can justify your action.
 Love decides there and then There are no rules about what should or shouldn’t
be done – in each situation, you decide there and
then what the most loving thing to do is.
 Biography

Joseph Fletcher was born in 1905. He was ordained as an Episcopal priest and taught Christian Ethics from
1944 to 1970. He published many works on a variety of subjects - ten books and more than 200 other items
over 50 years. His specialism was Bioethics, but he wrote about sex, birth control, abortion, eugenics, cloning,
euthanasia - he was president of the Euthanasia Society of America from 1974-1976 - distributive justice, war,
business ethics, etc.

Fletcher is best known as the founder of Situation Ethics, although it would better to call him the theory's
populariser, as the basic ideas had been around some time before Fletcher wrote 'Situation Ethics - the New
Morality' in 1966.

Many biographies say that Fletcher became an atheist before he died in 1991, although I cannot find a reliable
source for this claim. In his later years, Fletcher described himself as 'agnostic'.

Criticisms

Situation Ethics has great appeal, especially when faced with the realities of deontological ethics. It seems
ludicrous that a Catholic might choose to remove a fallopian tube from a woman with an ectopic pregnancy
(thereby resulting in the termination of the pregnancy but also in an inability to have further children) rather than
simply abort the foetus. Abortion, Natural Law tells us, is a wrong act. Yet compassion, and even common
sense, tells us it is better to abort a fetus to save the mother rather than let both die. Situation Ethics also
seems more in line with the example of Christ - Jesus seemed to put people before principles.

However, Situation Ethics has fierce critics. They argue that it allows terrible things to happen in an attempt to
do the right thing. Many Christians are not happy to let go of universal human rights. They feel that certain
actions simply are wrong, and that our priority should be doing God's will not just making people happy. An
eternal perspective means that even if bad consequences arise out of our actions (such as a pregnant woman
dying), God will make all things fair and right in heaven.

Others say that Situation Ethics makes morality subjective. In other words, this would mean there is no fact
about whether an action is right or wrong, merely different opinions. This seems to contradict basic Christian
beliefs about God making the world with a particular design and purpose for humans.

Situation Ethics is further criticised for being individualistic. The individual has too much control or influence,
and people tend to be selfish. If I am given complete freedom with no rules governing me, I am likely to misuse
this power. Agape - an unselfish, unconditional love - is a great ideal but is rarely achieved in practice. People
need rules to live by, and can't really be trusted to do the right thing without those rules.

Situation Ethics also receives the sorts of criticisms that Utilitarians face - outcomes or consequences are
unpredictable, incalculable and immeasurable. It just isn't possible to work out which action will have the best
consequences.
 Situation Ethics Explained

Fletcher

Teleological – Situation Ethics is not Fletcher quoted a St Louis cab driver who said
concerned with following rules but “Sometimes you’ve gotta put your principles to one side
with bringing about good and do the right thing”. Rules (or principles) aren’t the
same thing as doing what is right.
Situationist as opposed to legalistic or Some ethical theories suggest legalistic rules that
antinomian mustn’t be broken, This is wrong as it makes rules more
important than people, and doesn’t allow exceptions.
There are antinomians who reject rules entirely. This is
wrong as it leads to complete chaos with no laws at all,
and no way of choosing between two courses of action.
The situationist has respect for the laws, may often
follow the laws and be informed by tradition. However,
he is free to make the right choice according to the
situation.
Agape - "... goodwill at work in Agape is concern for others. Fletcher uses the term
partnership with reason" in seeking the ‘best interest’, so this seems much the same as Singer’s
"neighbour's best interest with a utilitarianism. We act out of love for others, trying to
careful eye to all the factors in the do the best to serve their interests.
situation".
Four working principles:
1. Pragmatism For a course of action to be right, it has to be practical.
It must work.
2. Relativism ‘It relativizes the absolute, it does not absolutize the
relative’. This means that rules (absolutes) don’t
always apply, they depend on the situation. Absolutes
like ‘Do not steal’ become relative to love – if love
demands stealing food for the hungry, you steal.
However, it doesn’t mean ‘anything goes’. He doesn’t
take a relative ‘Do whatever the situation demands’
and make it into an absolute [read the quote above
again to check you understand this]
3. Positivism Kant and Natural Law are based on reason – reason can
uncover the right course of action. Situation Ethics
disagrees, You have to start with a positive choice –
you need to want to do good. There is no rational
answer to the question “Why should I love?”
4. Personalism Situation Ethics puts people first. People are more
important than rules. “Man was not made for the
Sabbath”.
Six fundamental principles:
 Love only is always good Love is intrinsically valuable, it has inherent worth.
‘Only one ‘thing’ is intrinsically Love is good. Nothing else has intrinsic value but ‘it
good; namely, love: nothing else at gains or acquires its value only because it happens to
all’ help persons (thus being good) or to hurt persons (thus
being bad)’. A lie is not intrinsically wrong. It is
wrong if it harms people, but may sometimes be right.
‘For the Situationist, what makes the lie right is its
loving purpose; [they are] not hypnotised by some
abstract law, ‘Thou shalt not lie’.’
 Love is the only norm (rule) Love replaces the law. The law should only be obeyed
‘The ruling norm of Christian in the interests of love, not for the law’s sake!
decision is love: nothing else’ Fletcher rejects Natural Law. He says ‘There are no
[natural] universal laws held by all men everywhere at
all times.’ Jesus summarized the entire law by saying
‘Love God’ and ‘Love your neighbour’. Love is the only
law. The problem with this is that it allows the
individual to do anything in the name of love – there are
no rules to say that someone has done the wrong thing.
 Love and justice are the same There can be no love without justice. Consider any
"Love and justice are the same, for injustice – a child starving, a man arrested without
justice is love distributed, nothing charge etc. These are examples of a lack of love. If
else." love was properly shared out, there would be no
injustice.
 Love is not liking Love is discerning and critical, not sentimental. Martin
"Love wills the neighbor’s good Luther King described Agape love as a ‘creative,
whether we like him or not." redemptive goodwill to all men’. He said it would be
nonsense to ask people to like their violent oppressors.
Christian love is a non-selfish love of all people.
 Love justifies the means When someone said to Fletcher ‘The end doesn’t justify
"Only the end justifies the means; the means’, he said ‘Then what on earth does?’. If an
nothing else," action causes harm, it is wrong. If good comes of it, it
is right. Fletcher says you can’t claim to be right by
following a rule (like ‘Do not lie’) knowing it will cause
great harm. Only the end or outcome can justify your
action.
 Love decides there and then There are no rules about what should or shouldn’t be
done – in each situation, you decide there and then
what the most loving thing to do is.