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. With the intent to have a fair basis for judgments or action, one looks to personal ideals of what is appropriate to guide them, rather than an unchanging universal code of conduct, such as Biblical law under divine command theory or the Kantian categorical imperative. Proponents of situational approaches to ethics include existentialist philosophers Sartre, de Beauvoir, Jaspers, and Heidegger. 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. With the intent to have a fair basis for judgments or action, one looks to personal ideals of what is appropriate to guide them, rather than an unchanging universal code of conduct, such as Biblical law under divine command theory or the Kantian categorical imperative. Proponents of situational approaches to ethics include existentialist philosophers Sartre, de Beauvoir, Jaspers, and Heidegger. 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 liberal theologians Rudolf Bultmann, John A. T. Robinson, and Joseph Fletcher. 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.:33 Tillich, for example, declared that 'Love is the ultimate law.' 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,: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.:33–34 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') that 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.' 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.