Situation Ethics

Situation ethics is the theory that the morally right thing to do in any given situation is that which would result in the most “loving” outcome. It is a teleological theory, that meaning that the result is more important than the intermediate steps to get to the conclusion (like committing minor evils for a greater good).

This medium of thought was first outlined by Joseph Fletcher in his book “Situation Ethics: The New Morality”. Fletcher was an Episcopal priest[1] who developed the theory in the 60s. This theory was to cause much controversy, as Fletcher claimed that this was the ethical theory that Jesus followed.

This Christian ethical theory follows the idea that there are no moral absolutes, save that of love. Situation ethics is based around “love” more than anything. This “agape”[2] love on which Fletcher based his ethics is reminiscent of Jesus Christ in the bible.  Jesus tells his followers to “love thy neighbour” and essentially this is the basis fore situation ethics.

Fletcher’s view on laws was that there are no absolutist values or laws. The exception being the law of Agape, the law of love. As I previously stated, this mode of thought is teleological, meaning that the ends justify the means, as long as the most “agape” is produced at the end.

One of the main strengths about situation ethics is the fact that it is very simplistic and easy to follow. As often is the case with philosophical theories, some of the strongest cases are the simplest. If you are in an ethical dilemma, you simply weigh up the problems, and the result that produces the most “agape” should be the correct course of action.

Situation ethics is seen by most ethical scholars to be the middle ground between legalism[3] and antinomian relativism[4].  Fletcher also put forward the idea that Jesus was a situationist, rather than most thought, an absolutist. In “situation ethics: the new morality[5]” Fletcher states:

 “The situationist enters into every decision-making situation fully armed with the ethical maxims of his community and its heritage, and he treats them with respect as illuminators of his problems. Just the same he is prepared in any situation to compromise them or set them aside in the situation if love seems better served by doing so.”