Lesson video

Hello and welcome to today's lesson on Situation Ethics.

We're going to be looking at the ethical theory of situation ethics, and thinking about how it helps us when it comes to questions like how can we be good.

By the end of today's lesson, you are going to be able to explain the use of situation ethics in decision making and suggestion reasons for its usefulness.

Key vocabulary that we'll be using today are agape love, Joseph Fletcher and situation ethics.

Agape love is the selfless, unconditional love that Jesus taught through the command to love your neighbour as yourself.

Joseph Fletcher is an American Christian theologian who developed situation ethics in the 1960s.

And situation ethics is an ethical theory which argues that the most loving action should guide decisions in each situation.

There are two parts to today's lesson, the nature of Christian ethics and Joseph Fletcher's situation ethics.

So let's start with looking at the nature of Christian ethics.

Alex, Lucas, and Laura are trying to agree on how Christians make ethical decisions.

Alex says, for Christians, right and wrong must be based on God's commands or rules.

Lucas says, don't Christians think right and wrong is found by using our reason to understand God's natural order in the world.

And Laura says, surely Christians are interested in developing good character rather than just following rules.

When Alex describes Christian moral decision making as being based on God's commands or rules, he's talking about a particular approach.

Alex is taking a deontological approach, which means it's based on duties or rules from God, which are clearly set out in the Bible or in church teachings.

Lucas has a different idea about how Christians could choose right from wrong.

He says they could use reason to understand God's natural order in the world.

This approach is also deontological because it's based on rules.

It's just that these rules become clear when we use our reason to work out some built-in guidance that is there in nature.

Laura gives a contrasting approach.

She says, Christians are surely interested in developing good character.

They don't just want to follow the rules.

The approach she's outlining is not deontological because it isn't based on rules.

Instead, it focuses on becoming a good person and doing the right thing.

And Christians might argue that this is what Jesus did.

So let's see how you're doing so far.

Is this true or false? Christians all make ethical decisions in the same way.

Take some time to jot down your answer and have a think as well about why you have chosen the option that you did.

Pause the video and come back when you are ready.

Well done if you said this was false.

Christians don't make ethical decisions in the same way.

Let's have a think about why.

It's because Christians use different methods of making ethical decisions.

They might follow God's commands, they might focus on duties.

They might look for the most loving action.

They don't behave and decide in the same way.

So although Christians approach ethical decision making in many different ways, they do agree on some things.

And one thing is that agape love is important.

So let's have a look at why.

It's a Greek word used in the Bible and it means selfless and unconditional love.

It's different from romantic or friendship love.

Christians believe it's the love that God shows to his people, and it's the love that Jesus demonstrated in his life.

It is the word used for love in the Bible when Jesus says, "love your neighbour as yourself." Ethical decision making isn't straightforward and it is still difficult for Christians.

Although Christianity has rules like the 10 Commandments, it also appears to teach that sometimes rules should be broken.

Here's an example taken from the life of Jesus and it can be found in the Bible in Mark chapter three, verse four.

One day Jesus was in a synagogue on the Sabbath when a man with a withered hand was present.

The religious leaders, the Pharisees, watched closely hoping to catch Jesus breaking the law since healing on the Sabbath was not allowed.

But Jesus seeing the man's need asked him to stand up, then looked round at the Pharisees and asked, which is lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill? In verse five, it tells us when they didn't answer, Jesus filled with love and compassion told the man to stretch out his hand.

As he did, his hand was completely healed.

And so we have a story showing how Jesus showed agape love, even when it meant breaking the Sabbath rule, which he as a good Jewish man should have been following.

I'd like you to have a think about this story.

Jesus had a very different idea about rule breaking from the idea of the Pharisees who were the teachers of the law.

Why do you think people have different views on rule breaking? Talk to somebody nearby.

Take some time, talk to me if you need to, and pause and come back when you've had time to think about the question.

So let's check your understanding.

Which of the following is an example of agape love? A, a friend buys you a gift because it's your birthday.

B, a person helps a stranger in need without expecting anything in return.

C, a couple share a romantic dinner on their anniversary.

Or D, a teammate gives you advice to help you win a game.

Think about the meaning of the word agape love and choose the answer that you think is correct.

Take some time to jot that down.

Pause if you need to, and then come back to check how you did.

Well done if you put B.

The others are all examples of love, but they're not agape love because they are not entirely selfless or unconditional.

So let's have a go at practising and see what your understanding of the nature of Christian ethics is.

For task A, I would like you to explain whether each of the following actions demonstrates agape love and to explain why.

A, forgiving someone who has hurt you.

B, donating to charity and posting it on social media.

C, emptying the dishwasher to earn your pocket money.

D, helping someone who has helped you in the past.

And E, volunteering in a local charity shop.

Take some time to think about whether it's a yes or no for agape love in each situation and make sure you include an explanation.

Pause a video and come back when you're ready to check your work.

Let's have a look at what you wrote.

You could have said for A forgiving someone who has hurt you, this is agape.

Because forgiving someone, even when they don't deserve it, is selfless and unconditional and usually forgiveness, the whole point of it is that person doesn't really deserve it 'cause they did something wrong.

In B, donating to charity and posting it on social media, you could have said, this is not agape love as donating for attention is selfish.

For C, emptying the dishwasher to earn your pocket money.

You could have said this is not agape as doing housework for money is about personal gain, not selfless love.

For D, helping someone who has helped you in the past.

You could have said this is not agape because it's about giving back because you expect something in return.

And for E, volunteering in a local charity shop, you could have said, this is agape because you're helping others without expecting anything in return.

Well done if you manage to successfully say that A and E are both examples of agape.

So now that we've got some idea about what Christian ethics is all about, we're gonna move on and look closely at Joseph Fletcher's situation ethics.

So it's really important to know that Joseph Fletcher was a Christian and he came up with his ethical theory from that position, from the position of being a Christian and wondering how should he behave.

He was born in 1905 in the United States and became known for his work in ethics, particularly for creating the theory of situation ethics.

He believed that ethical decisions should depend on the specific circumstances rather than on following strict rules.

Raised in a Christian family, Fletcher's religious background shaped his belief that love or agape should guide ethical decisions.

In his book "Situation Ethics", Joseph Fletcher wrote that only one thing is intrinsically good.

And by that he meant good in and of itself.

And for Fletcher that one thing was love.

He proposed the ethical theory of situation ethics in the 1960s, and this was a time when people generally were questioning the rules and traditions of the past.

Fletcher was a Christian theologian and he believed that when it comes to making ethical decisions, you shouldn't always follow fixed rules.

So he was challenging some of those views in Christianity.

Instead, he felt the right decision should depend on the situation and the most loving thing to do.

Fletcher thought some rules just didn't work in real life, for example, telling the truth is usually considered the right thing to do.

But what if telling the truth would hurt someone or cause a lot of harm? Fletcher believed that in those cases, love should be the deciding factor and sometimes it might be more loving to break a rule.

In his book "Situation Ethics: The New Morality" published in 1966, Fletcher explained that agape, which means unconditional love, should guide all ethical decisions.

Now at the time, this theory was controversial because it questioned traditional Christian beliefs about following rules, and his ideas sparked some debates about whether it's right to ignore rules for the sake of love and whether this approach could lead to people making unfair or even confusing decisions.

So how do you feel about this idea that love is a guiding force? Are there times when doing the good or right thing doesn't seem very loving? Take some time, talk to somebody nearby if there's someone around or you can talk to me.

Pause the video and come back when you are ready to move on.

So let's check your understanding.

This is a true or false statement.

Situation ethics is deontological.

Take a moment, remember what deontological means, and then decide if the statement is true or false.

Jot down your answer, pause if you need to, and then come back to me.

Well done, excellent work if you wrote down that this is false.

Deontological is rule-based and situation ethics is not rule-based.

So let's explain why in a little bit more detail.

Situation ethics is not deontological because it doesn't follow strict rules.

Instead, it focuses on choosing the most loving action, which makes it more about the results than the rules.

Now Fletcher worked really hard to try and explain his situation ethics, and in his book he gave lots of different examples of people applying situation ethics.

Here's one of them.

There was a woman named Maria.

She lived in a country during World War II, which was occupied by the Nazis.

Maria was hiding Jewish refugees in her house, trying to protect them from the soldiers who were hunting them down.

One day a Nazi soldier knocked on her door.

He demanded to know where the refugees were hiding, and Maria was faced with a terrible choice.

If she told the truth, the refugees will be found and killed, but if she lied, she will be breaking the rule that lying is wrong.

Now, this kind of scenario happens many, many times in World War II and it's certainly something that people would've come across.

According to Fletcher, in Maria's case, lying to the soldier was the most loving choice because it helped to protect the refugees from harm, even though lying is usually seen as wrong in Christianity.

He believed that love should be the most important thing that you take into account when making moral decisions.

And in this case, lying would be the most loving action because it would save innocent lives.

Now it's quite difficult to argue about that situation, but I wonder if you're thinking about different situations, whether you would still agree with Fletcher that lying is not always wrong.

Take some time, talk to somebody nearby if you can, or you can pause and talk to me and come back when you are ready to continue.

So let's think through how situation ethics actually works in practise.

Imagine you're walking home from school and you see a friend sitting by the side of the road crying.

They've clearly had a bad day and they might need someone to talk to, but you are already running late for an important school project that you need to finish when you get home tonight.

Now let's apply ethics to this scenario.

Here's how it could work.

Number one, you would identify the different actions you could take so you have a few choices.

You could stop and help your friend by talking to them, or you could walk past them and hurry home to work on your project.

Maybe there's also the option to quickly tell your friend you'll talk later, but at least check in with them first.

Two, calculate how much love will be produced by each action.

If you stop and listen to your friend, it will show them love and care.

They might feel supported and less upset even if you are late for your project.

If you walk past them, they might feel abandoned and alone, even though you'd be saving time for your schoolwork.

If you quickly check in and then say you'll talk later, you might show that you care, but your friend might still feel sad that you didn't give them your full attention.

Three, choose the action that brings about the most love regardless of rules.

In this case, stopping to help your friend might create more love because they need emotional support, and your project can probably wait for a little while.

Even if it means being late for what you plan to do, helping your friend could make a bigger difference to their wellbeing at that moment.

In situation ethics, you make the decision based on love, not strict rules like never be late or always finish your work first.

The focus is on what helps the people involved and what creates the most love in the situation.

So in this example, your most loving choice is to stop and help your friend no matter what rules you think you should be following.

We've already thought a little bit about whether rules should sometimes be broken.

I'd like you now thinking through this scenario to consider whether acting on the basis of agape love is always more important than following rules or than doing anything else.

Talk to somebody nearby if you can, or pause and talk to me, and then come back when you are ready.

So let's check your understanding.

How does situation ethics work? Is it A, by following strict rules in all situations? B, by acting in the most loving way for each situation.

C, by working out which action produces the most happiness.

Or D, by consulting religious leaders to make the best choice.

Take some time, jot down which letter you think is correct, pause if you need to, and then come back.

Well done if you put B, it is acting in the most loving way for each situation.

Because situation ethics isn't rule-based, it has the same kind of difficulties as other theories that are consequentialist or teleological.

One criticism is that it is not very clear what course of action you should take because it's quite hard to know exactly what the consequences of an action would be and therefore to work out which will produce the most love and therefore which action is best.

Sometimes people might even justify actions that might actually be wrong on the basis that they're acting out of love.

For example, someone might decide to shoplift a coat to keep their family warm during the winter, and they might argue that stealing is the loving thing to do in this situation because it helps their loved ones.

But someone who criticised this might argue that this makes it far too easy to justify harmful actions because you could claim that you had done anything out of love.

So the problem is that what one person sees as loving could be different from someone else's idea.

Another person might believe that helping the family in another way, like finding support from a charity would be more loving.

And it's this inconsistency with how to apply it that makes it hard to create a clear and reliable moral system using situation ethics.

So take some time to think about other situations.

Can you come up with some other examples of when it would be quite difficult to work out the most loving course of action and when someone might actually disagree on what that would be, turn and talk to somebody nearby if there's someone around, or pause and talk to me and then come back when you are ready.

So let's see how you've done in understanding Joseph Fletcher's situation ethics.

For task B one, you are going to practise applying situation ethics.

In the example, someone is on their way to work when they see a car accident ahead.

They're first at the scene, but if they stop to help out, they will be late to work.

Your task is to explain what situation ethics suggest this person should do.

A, think about the scenario and identify the different actions that could be taken.

B, calculate how much agape love would be produced by each action.

C, choose the action that brings about the most agape love.

Take your time, work through the three sections and explain what the person should do if they're following situation ethics.

Pause the video and come back when you are ready.

Let's check your work.

Here's what you could have said for task B one.

For A, think about the scenario and identify the different actions that could be taken.

You could have said they could follow the rules and make sure they weren't late to work, or they could stop the car in order to help out.

For B, calculate how much agape love would be produced by each action.

You could have said being on time to work is supportive of colleagues and managers, but in this case it would mean they hadn't stopped to help people who might be in need.

For C, choose the action that brings about the most agape love.

You could have said the most loving action would be to stop the car and help those involved in the accident.

Well done if you wrote something along these lines, most likely situation ethics would mean that the person stopped to help the people involved in the accident.

In task B two, we're going to have a think about one of the difficulties with situation ethics.

A doctor faces a shortage of medical supplies and must decide whether to treat one critically ill patient or a larger group of people with less urgent conditions.

Alex and Lucas are thinking about situation ethics.

Lucas explains why the doctor should treat the large group.

Use the sentence starter provided to prompt you to explain why Alex disagrees.

Lucas says, helping the larger group is the most loving choice because it benefits more people.

Now Alex is going to use situation ethics as well, but he's going to disagree with Lucas decision.

Use the sentence starter as your prompt to explain why someone might disagree.

Alex says, helping the critically ill patient is the most loving choice because.

Take your time to explain your answer.

Pause the video and cut when you are ready to check what you've written.

Let's have a look at what you could have said.

You could have said, helping the critically ill patient is the most loving choice because it meets their urgent need for care.

By saving their life, the doctor shows compassion, which is at the heart of situation ethics.

Well done if you said something similar to this, especially if you managed to use the word agape love.

So let's have a look at what we've learned today about situation ethics.

Firstly, Christians make ethical decisions in a variety of ways.

Joseph Fletcher developed situation ethics in the 1960s as an alternative way of making ethical decisions in Christianity.

Situation ethics argues that love is the only thing that is always good, and it is not deontological.

It is a teleological theory.

Applying situation ethics means weighing up different actions and choosing the one which is the most loving and a criticism of situation ethics is that people have different ideas about which action is the most loving.

Thank you for all your hard work on this lesson today.

Well done.