World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

Situational ethics

Article Id: WHEBN0001291485
Reproduction Date:

Title: Situational ethics  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Situated ethics, Situationalism, Joseph Fletcher, Contextualism, Moral equivalence
Collection: Christian Terminology, Relational Ethics, Religious Ethics
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia

Situational ethics

Situational ethics, or situation ethics, takes into account the particular context of an act when evaluating it ethically, rather than judging it according to absolute moral standards. In situation ethics, within each context, it is not a universal law that is to be followed, but the law of love. A Greek word used to describe love in the Bible is "agape". Agape is the type of love that shows concern about others, caring for them as much as one cares for oneself. Agape love is conceived as having no strings attached to it and seeking nothing in return; it is a totally unconditional love.[1] Early proponents of situational approaches to ethics included Kierkegaard, Sartre, de Beauvoir, Jaspers, and Heidegger.[2]

Specifically Christian forms of situational ethics placing love above all particular principles or rules were proposed in the first half of the twentieth century by Rudolf Bultmann, John A. T. Robinson, and Joseph Fletcher.[3] These theologians point specifically to agapē, or unconditional love, as the highest end. Other theologians who advocated situational ethics include Josef Fuchs, Reinhold Niebuhr, Karl Barth, Emil Brunner, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and Paul Tillich.[4]:33 Tillich, for example, declared that "Love is the ultimate law."[5]

Fletcher, who became prominently associated with this approach in the English-speaking world due to his book (Situation Ethics), stated that "all laws and rules and principles and ideals and norms, are only contingent, only valid if they happen to serve love" in the particular situation,[4]:30 and thus may be broken or ignored if another course of action would achieve a more loving outcome. Fletcher has sometimes been identified as the founder of situation ethics, but he himself refers his readers to the active debate over the theme that preceded his own work.[4]:33-34


  • Ethical classification and origin of term 1
  • Fletcher 2
    • The four working principles 2.1
    • The six fundamental principles (propositions) 2.2
    • Examples 2.3
      • Himself Might his Quietus Make 2.3.1
      • Special Bombing Mission No. 13 2.3.2
      • Christian Cloak and Dagger 2.3.3
      • Sacrificial Adultery 2.3.4
    • Biblical links 2.4
  • See also 3
  • References 4
  • External links 5

Ethical classification and origin of term

Situational ethics is a form of consequentialism, though distinct from utilitarianism in that the latter's aim is "the greatest good for the greatest number", while situational ethics focuses on creating the greatest amount of love. Situational ethics can also be classed under the ethical theory genre of "proportionalism" which says that "It is never right to go against a principle unless there is a proportionate reason which would justify it."[6] J. A. T. Robinson, a situational ethicist, considered the approach to be a form of ethical relativism.

There was an active debate in the mid-twentieth century around situational ethics, which was being promoted by a number of primarily Protestant theologians. The English term "situation ethics" was taken from the German Situationsethik. It is unclear who first coined the term either in German or in its English variant.


Fletcher proposed that in forming an ethical system based on love, he was best expressing the notion of "love thy neighbor," which Jesus Christ taught in the Gospels of the New Testament of the Bible. Through situational ethics, Fletcher was attempting to find a "middle road" between legalistic and antinomian ethics. Fletcher developed his theory of situational ethics in his books: The Classic Treatment and Situation Ethics. Situational ethics is thus a teleological or consequential theory, in that it is primarily concerned with the outcome or consequences of an action; the end. Fletcher proposed that loving ends justify any means.[4]

Fletcher outlined his theory in four "working principles" and six "fundamental principles".

The four working principles

The following are presuppositions Fletcher makes before setting out the situational ethics theory:

  1. Pragmatism - An action someone makes should be judged according to the love influenced in it, so the user must always ask: what is the most loving thing to do? For example, war may not - to a situationist - be considered the most 'loving' thing and so many are quick to deem it as morally wrong.
  2. Relativism - Approaching every situation with a relative mindset and thus opposing legalistic approaches - avoid words such as 'never', 'complete' and 'perfect'.
  3. Positivism - The most important choice of all in the teachings in 1 John 4:7-12 is "let us love one another because love is from God".
  4. Personalism - Whereas the legalist thinks people should work to laws, the situational ethicist believes that laws are for the benefit of the people. This forces the user to ask 'who is to be helped?' instead of 'what is the law', stressing the importance of people before laws.

The six fundamental principles (propositions)

First proposition
Only one thing is intrinsically good; namely love: nothing else at all. Fletcher (1963, pg56) - an action is good only in so far as it brings about agape.
Second proposition
The ruling norm of Christian decision is love: nothing else. Fletcher (1963, pg69) - the most important commandment is to love God and "love thy neighbour".
Third proposition
Love and Justice are the same, for justice is love distributed, nothing else. Fletcher (1963, pg87) - asks that one must always have an eye on the intention of an action.
Justice is Christian love using its head, calculating its duties, obligations, opportunities, resources... Justice is love coping with situations where distribution is called for. Fletcher (1963, pg95)
Fourth proposition
Love wills the neighbour's good, whether we like him or not. Fletcher (1963, pg103) - illustrates that agape is not an emotion as it sometimes involves sacrifice, we must thus love not expecting anything in return.
Fifth proposition
Only the end justifies the means, nothing else. Actions only acquire moral status as a means to an end; for Fletcher, the end must be the most loving result. When measuring a situation, one must consider the desired end, the means available, the motive for acting and the foreseeable consequences. Fletcher (1963, pg120) - thus, you must recognise that anything may be done if it brings about the most loving outcome.
Sixth proposition
Love's decisions are made situationally, not prescriptively. Fletcher (1963, pg134)


Fletcher proposed various examples of situations in which the established moral laws might need to be put on hold in order to achieve the greater amount of love. These were based upon real situations.

Himself Might his Quietus Make

Pragmatism, positivism, relativism and personalism are the 4 working principles which mean to be reasonably sure the act you take will work and provide the most loving consequence, accepting Situational Ethics as a matter of faith and not reason, each situation must be relative to love and bring about the most loving result and finally the needs of people come first rather than a set of rules.

Special Bombing Mission No. 13

Christian Cloak and Dagger

Sacrificial Adultery

These situations were criticised by many as being quite extreme, although Joseph Fletcher agreed that they were so, because in normal cases, the general guidelines should be applied and it is only in extreme cases that exceptions would need to be made.

Biblical links

As a priest, Joseph Fletcher claimed situational ethics to be a true set of Christian morals that tie in with Biblical teaching. However, not all people agree with him on this, so here are some passages of relevant biblical scripture (from the New International Version), and it is left to the reader as to whether the teachings of situational ethics are Biblical or not.

"One of...[the Pharisees], an expert in the law, tested Him with this question: 'Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?' Jesus replied: ''Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbour as yourself.' All the Law and Prophets hang on these two commandments.'"
(Matthew 22:35-40)

"The Law by itself was unable to save anyone since no one was capable of its fulfillment. Thus the Law served (initially) only to increase sin since it posed many rules available to be broken. However, it was through the Law (rather than by the Law) that the possibility of salvation would come. One man, came and fulfilled the Law. This righteousness was imputed to some through faith, which altered their eternal destiny. Now sure of a right relationship with God, and with knowledge of God's eternal promise, they were free to enter into a genuinely loving relationship with God, and they love God by loving others."

See also


  1. ^ "Situation ethics", The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition (2000)
  2. ^ Mark E. Graham, Josef Fuchs on Natural Law, Georgetown University Press, 2002. P. 8
  3. ^ Porter, Burton Frederick (2001). The Good Life: Alternatives in Ethics. p. 211. 
  4. ^ a b c d Fletcher, Joseph (1997). Situation ethics: The new morality. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.  
  5. ^ Tillich, Systematic Theology, v. 1, p. 152
  6. ^ Hoose, 1987
  7. ^

External links

  • Situation ethics (contextualism), on John Dewey and James Hayden Tufts(1922), and Fletcher (1995)
  • "Situational Ethics, Social Deception, and Lessons of Machiavelli" (2004)
  • (2005, revised 2014)Dewey's Moral Philosophy
  • Situational Ethics explained, evaluated and applied An introduction to Fletcher's Situational Ethics from
  • Situation Ethics Article Another overview and explanation of Fletcher's situational ethics.
This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.

Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Hawaii eBook Library are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.