Fletcher on the morality of an action
“The morality of an action depends on the situation”
Joseph Fletcher
- Life: 1905-91
- founded situation ethics in the 1960s
- Book: situation ethic (1963)
- Ethical principles are true to Christianity but still radically different to rigid Christian legalism
Legalism
- Prefabricated moral rules and regulations
- Rules are absolute with no flexibility and they must always be adhered to
- Judaism/Christianity use legalist ethics (Biblical commandments)
- Objective
Why did Fletcher reject legalism?
- Rules for everything are impractical as we cannot think independently
- We cannot make rules for every circumstance
- Excessive rule making leads to a choking web of laws that are not actually always moral. Ie rules cannot be applied to every situation, and if we made a rule for everything we would have to follow an impractical guidebook to ethics
- Therefore fanatical legalism is rejected by Fletcher
Antinomian approach to ethics
- Literally means “against law”
- Spontaneous decision making. Spur of the moment
- Every situation is treated as if unique
- “Anarchic- i.e. without a rule.” - Fletcher
Why did Fletcher reject antinomianism?
- No principles
- Too spontaneous therefore you cannot guarantee a moral outcome
Situation ethics as the ‘middle way’
- More concerned with love and the people than the rules
- Situationist will enter each situation with the rules/traditions of their tradition to hand
- However they will set aside such rules is love would be better served
- What to do depends on the situation
- Nothing is intrinsically good
Fletcher quote on situation ethics as the ‘middle way’
-“The situationist follows a moral law but violates it according to love’s need”
Biblical quote supporting situation ethics as a Christian ethical theory
“Christ Jesus…abolished the law with its commandments and legal claims” - New testament (Ephesians)
Principles of situation ethics
- Used to guide the situationist in making moral decisions as each situation is unique so may be complicated
- Principles do not direct the course of action but may guide the situationist
- Principles are the “four working principles/four presumptions” and the “six fundamental principles”
- Four working principles are more general presuppositions
First fundamental principle
“Only one thing is intrinsically good; namely love: nothing else at all.”
-Actions cannot be intrinsically good, only love can be. But they may be extrinsically good (good if…””)
Second fundamental principle
“The ruling norm of Christian decision is love: nothing else.”
- Only love can guide decision making
- Commandments are not absolute, and can be ignored if love would be better served
- E.g. Jesus working on the sabbath, so love could be better served
- Paul: love fulfils the law
Third fundamental principle
“Love and justice are the same, for justice is love distributed, nothing else.”
- Justice and love cannot be separated
- Justice may be achieved if love is at work for the entire community
- “Justice is love coping with situations where distribution is called for” -Fletcher
Fourth fundamental principle
“Love wills the neighbour’s good, whether we like him or not”
- Love in this sense is not a feeling, but the will towards another person
- Not erotic, but a desire for good
- Selfless and unconditional - Agape love
Fifth fundamental principle
“Only the end justifies the means, nothing else.”
- Consequentialist
- End must be the most loving result
- Actions acquire a moral status as a means to an end (the end being love, it is justified)
Sixth fundamental principle
“(L)ove’s situations are made situationally, not prescriptively.”
- Opposes rule-based morality
- Jesus distanced himself from Jewish sects who lived under such systems of morality
- Whether something is write or wrong depends on the situation
- If love is served, it is right. Eg adultery is acceptable so long as no one is hurt (themselves, partners or others) though this is hard to judge(?)
Fletcher quote in support of the sixth fundamental principle
“Whether any form of sex is good or evil depends on whether love is fully served” - Fletcher
Fletcher quote in support of the third fundamental principle
“It (love) uses a shotgun, not a rifle.”
Pragmatism
- The proposed action must work, and must work towards the end, which is love
- Common sense, logical, accounts for all aspects to situation
- E.g. Case of conjoined twins Jodie+Mary. Catholic church wanted to let both die, as to kill one would be an evil deed absolutely forbidden by the 10 commandments. Fletcher would have disagreed with this as love would not have best been served by this course of action. Would argue love would be better served by killing one and allowing the other to live.
Evaluation of pragmatism
Strength: Pragmatism optimises love, ensuring that the course of action proposed will achieve the best possible result (maximised love)
Weakness: As situation ethics is consequential you can never guarantee that the proposed action will result in the most love
Relevatism
- Reject all absolute rules and values
- There are no fixed rules that must always be obeyed
- However, not a free for all. All action must be for the good of love
- Situation ethics “relavitizes the absolute, it does not absolutize the relative”
- “The situationist avoids words life ‘never’ and ‘perfect’ and ‘always’ and ‘complete’ as he avoids the plague, as he avoids ‘absolutely’”
Evaluation of relevatism
Strengths: flexible to suit the situation so love may be best served. Also approachable as upbringing/cultural conditioning means people have different values, so this ethical system can be followed by everyone as it is flexible
Weaknesses: Can be individualistic, as rules may be disregarded, possibly for selfish motivation. It may justify any heinous act in the name of love. Hard to imagine an instance where heinous acts would actually serve love
Personalism
- People>laws
- People are more sacred than rules or laws, hence why they may be abandoned if love may be better experienced by the people
- Serving people is loving, therefore more loving act will put people first
- “There are no ‘values’ in the sense of inherent goods - value is what happens to something when it happens to be useful to love working for the sake of persons”
Evaluation of personalism
Strengths: Protects the people which is loving
Weaknesses: May contradict the fundamental principles “Only the ends justify the means…” - if love is better served can people be protected?
