hello to you I do hope you're well and welcome to this a-level religious studies revision video I'm Bill mortal and today we are talking about situation ethics so we are discussing the key Christian ethical Theory the teleological ethical theory that is situation ethics and as you can see we'll be talking through these five key areas we'll be looking at the background to situation ethics so how did Fletcher end up devising this ethical Theory we'll be looking in particular at Agape throughout the particular kind of love that underpins situation ethics and we'll be looking at that in the teachings and examples set by Jesus the man himself will then be looking at Fletcher's four presuppositions so the four presumptions if I can call them that that Fletcher makes and the underpin his uh situation ethics Theory they really are the pillars that underpin situation ethics we'll be exploring them we'll then talk about his sixth working principles so we'll look at how he see situation ethics working in practice and then of course we'll be looking at our ao2 so we'll be looking at the strengths and the weaknesses of situation ethics with reference to other ethical theories as well so thank you for joining me let's get started shall we I think in the spirit of doing the most loving thing I think you need to get a few snacks do you know what I mean get your favorite foods get the snacks that you love out pun fully intended and let's get started um I'm very excited I love this topic actually I think it's really interesting to consider where Fletcher is coming from and then to also think about how his theory can actually be applied you know and there are some very strong criticisms for example from Barclay about the fact that this Theory really is quite impractical it sounds lovely doesn't it to say let's always do the most loving thing but actually if you're devising an ethical Theory that's going to work in the real world this just doesn't work because you know you can't just say the Only Rule we're going to have in life is do them most looking thing and you know what would the consequences of that be don't humans need more rules more guidance more legislation for example that is certainly what Barclay is going to be saying a little bit later on but first before we jump straight to the ao2 let's just start by taking a step back and let's meet the key thinkers who we will be discussing today so I think it's really important to always be linking any points you make in your essays back to the person who said it just to show the examiners that you've got real expertise on situation ethics so if you can research a Scholars that's going to really impress your examiner so of course we'll be talking about Joseph Fletcher the main man who devised this theory in the 1960s we'll also be talking about Jesus Christ the one and only so we're going back 2 000 years to look at the roots of this theory in the New Testament in the teachings and examples set by Jesus Christ we'll be looking at William Temple a former Archbishop to heavily influenced Joseph Fletcher in terms of talking about the importance of love in Christian ethics we'll be talking about Pope Pius XII who was a Critic of situation ethics and he really represents the Catholic Church his criticism of situation ethics they side with natural moral law as the Christian ethical Theory although we will talk about how Pope Francis has been maybe more liberal and have put more emphasis on doing the most loving thing so we'll consider that later we'll be talking about William Barclay he's booking quite happy there but let me tell you he is not happy about situation ethics we'll be talking about his book Ethics in a permissive society and it's fair to say he is not impressed with Fletcher and he completely annihilates most of what Fletcher said so lots to talk about there and I also want to draw your attention to the fact that Jeremy Bentham is very important when we talk about situation ethics we know that Fletcher was inspired by Bentham and his utilitarianism of course situation and ethics and utilitarianism are both teleological that both consequentialist theories and but in particular Fletcher was inspired in creating his Agape calculus by um Benson's calculus his specific calculus and so we'll be looking at some comparisons between Bentham secular um approach to ethics and then how that is in fired I'm making up words now doing excuse me I meant to say inspired um Fletcher and the development of situation ethics and as I say we will constantly be making those links between the ethical Theory very important that we do so in terms of developing our evaluation developing our critical analysis and showing the examiner that we are experts in religious ethics so plenty of opportunities to make those links to you know make those connections and you know we'll be looking out for those opportunities throughout today's revision video before we do get started I just want to start by going over couple of key terms I think these key terms are really important for us maximizing our marks in the AQA um religious ethics exam so the first key term is agape now we'll be talking in just a moment about what kind of love Fletcher talks about or he means when he says you should do the most loving thing and and to give you a little spoiler it is agape which is defined as unconditional Selfless Love the highest form of Christian love yeah so when Fletcher is saying do the most loving thing he is talking about a particular kind of love you know and I think we all use the word love in a much more relaxed way if I can put it like that you know you might say I love the Kardashians I love a mince pie sorry I'm filming this just before Christmas you know it sounds very random if you're watching in the summer you might say I love a mince pie I love a green tea if you may don't judge you know but actually when he talks about doing the most loving thing it's not love in that kind of emotional emotive way if I can put it like that it's this unconditional Selfless Love modeled by Jesus Christ and we'll talk about that in a moment and seen as the highest form of Christian love the Agape calculus then is as I said parallel to Benson's philosophic calculus and it is a way of deciding action so obviously situation ethics is about deciding in that situation what is the most loving thing to do what cause of action to take and the Agape calculus is designed by Fletcher to help you make that decision so you're not just stood there going what is the most loving thing to do he actually gives you a little calculus to calculate and make your decision based on that so you know that's his little tool he might have created an App if apps existed back in the 60s and we could all get out our Agape calculus and be calculating in every situation Anthony no many I can't say the word excuse me I'm starting that so confidently anti-nominalism there we go is um really important it's a really fancy word and it just means against law so you are anti-norm that's how I like to remember it it's the belief that there should be no laws or principles governing behavior I'm not going to attempt to say the word again but there it is so it's this idea that you are completely against rules and of course that would lead to Anarchy legalism I can say that word is strict and rigid Conformity to all laws and rules so we would associate this with natural moral law so in contrast legalism is about always following the rules and being very strict in as I say following them and sticking to them and intrinsic good then is something that is ethically good in and of itself now in Fletcher's Theory the only intrinsic good is love everything else is subjective and we'll talk about what that means a little bit later on okay let's talk about his for presuppositions and very quickly personalism this is the idea that morality should be about people not rule for you should prioritize people rather than following rules positivism this is the idea that love is the only intrinsically good thing and you hold that belief by faith rather than fact so you have faith first and then you work out how to back that belief up this is very similar to Saint Anselm's ontological argument and the idea that Faith perceives understanding and this is one of your key as I say presuppositions one of your four presuppositions for Fletcher's situation ethics we then have pragmatism very simply this means that we should do whatever works in the situation so it's doing the most practical thing in each circumstance and then relativism is another one of those four key pre I can't speak today doing excuse me one of those four presuppositions which is that morality is relative to the situation attention and finally teleological ethics which is an example or situation ethics is an example of this is the idea that you should look to the consequences or the ends of your actions to determine whether they are morally right and the word itself is derived from the ancient Greek telof which we know from our studio Aristotle means purpose or ultimate Aim so with teleological ethics you are thinking about the outcomes whereas with deontological ethics you are thinking about the act itself okay so we made it through the key terms I really should have rehearsed that shouldn't I but there we go there are the key terms let's get started so what I want to do and I'm seeing that word again and I'm trying to decide in my head should I try and say it again or not antinomialism there we go so on this um chart here you have got the two extremes that I've just mentioned on the one hand you've got antinomialism the rejection and abandonment of all laws and rules and Fletch rejects this he says you know this cannot work it does not work and so he rejects anti-nominalism there we go I've got it now on the other hand at The Other Extreme end is legalism and this is strict and rigid Conformity to all laws and rules so as you can see you've got these 2x streams when it comes to rules and laws on the one hand you've got the complete rejection and abandonment of them and then on the other hand you've got strict and rigid Conformity to all of them and as I say Fletcher sees these as the two extremes and he rejects both of them and instead he says we need to find a middle ground and that middle ground is Believe It or Not situation ethics so situation ethics is all about taking this Middle Ground between the extreme of antinomialism when there are absolutely no laws and rules and the extreme of legalism where you have strict and rigid Conformity to every single tiny Rule and law and as I say he plays this situation ethics in the middle it is the middle ground it's supposed to balance the two out and he says that is the optimal the perfect place for an ethical Theory to be located as a center point in the middle of those two extremes so remember he rejects both of them and he arrives at this Middle Point the Middle Ground if you like which is situation ethics and he is very much in fired again I can't speak today excuse me he is very much inspired by this man here William Temple who was a former Archbishop of Canterbury who said this I love this quote let's hope I can actually read it he said it is axiomatic that love should be the predominant Christian impulse now this heavily influenced this lecture this idea that love should be the predominant Christian impulse that above everything else love should be the predominant impulse that a Christian lives their life by that this should be their priority in the things they do in the ethical decisions they make and in the way that they live their lives love should always be the predominant Christian impulse and we'll look at the New Testament origins of this belief in just a moment and so Fletcher decides that love is the only Universal now I love this quote I have this quote on a Post-It note when I was through my levels because it's so easy to remember and it is brilliant to apply in the exam because it really encapsulates what situation ethics is all about it's this idea that love and we'll talk about what love is and what love means is the only Universal that is the only thing that is always right in every situation according to Fletcher and indeed he has a very interesting idea of what Love Actually is because as they say we do have this debate about well you're doing the most living thing but what is the most loving thing he says that love is Justice distributed and if you think about legal systems what are they all about they're about Justice aren't they and so he is saying that love is the best impulse love is the best thing to make all your decisions by and live your life by because it is Justice distributed it is not just some emotion it's not just some feeling of sympathy or empathy and indeed he rejects that as an understanding of love in this kind context he said it is just this distributed so it is fairness it is righteousness it is the right thing and that is very important for understanding Fletcher and understanding situation ethics so that does lead me on to this question of what do we mean by love and I think it's very very important that we establish this from the outset because when you're talking about situation ethics you're constantly go in do the most loving thing but what do we actually mean when we say do the most loving thing as you can see here Fletcher chooses Agape as his understanding of Christian love that is the unconditional Selfless Love that you have and it is best demonstrated by Jesus his love was not subjective his love was not based on I really like your hair I'm gonna help you I really like your outfit today let me give you some salvation his love according to Christianity was unconditional and selfless best exemplified by his um death as a sacrifice on the cross he did that as this act of unconditional Selfless Love he gave up his life for all Humanity that is the idea at the core of Christianity and so Agape is what we mean when we talk about Christian love in the context of situation ethics it is unconditional Selfless Love it's been prepared to sacrifice yourself your own life in Jesus's case for the good of others even people that you don't know so it is not liking and that's going to be one of the uh working principles that love is not liking it's not about liking something or as they say having an emotional reaction or an emotional connection it is unconditional it is selfless so very important we know that in contrast we do then have other kinds of love that the Greeks spoke about so Eros for example which was erotic passionate sexual love that is obviously not the kind of love Fletcher is talking about in situation ethics you don't think what is going to be the most erotic thing to do in this situation let's do that and philia again friendly or friendship love between equals again you know that's kind of conditional isn't it based on being friends with somebody again that's not what situation ethics is and then storage as well which is family love especially of parents and children now of course that's important for Christians but it's not the greatest kind kind of love in Christianity it you know it is agape that is modeled by Jesus as this unconditional Selfless Love That Christians should try to put into practice in their own lives then Bonhoeffer I think has a great quote on this this is a personal favorite of mine and he said what is a life full of pleasure honor Fame and glamor compared to a life lived in love and I think that quote really encapsulates the Christian understanding of love because I think many people would say oh you know it's I love pleasure I love honor I love Fame I love glamor but then he is Contracting those things with love and I think that demonstrates how radical this Christian idea of Love is that it is unconditional Selfless Love it's not love for yourself it's not love for pleasures and fame and fortune and it's not conditional you know it's not the love you might have for a Louis Vuitton bag it is unconditional and selfless and as I say this is derived from scripture this is derived from the New Testament where we see the life of Jesus and we hear the teachings of Jesus so let me just give you some of the key scriptural quotes that underpin this idea of Agape in situation ethics so we we read in John chapter 15 that Jesus says my command is this love each other as I have loved you so the idea is that Agape has come from Jesus he has given it to you he has modeled it and he has given it to you as a key example Saint Paul writes in Romans chapter 12 love must be sincere so it must be authentic it must be real you must be genuine um Galatians Saint Paul writes we love because he first loved us so again it's the idea that this comes from Jesus that you are capable of it that you know what it is because it's been muddled by Jesus it's been demonstrated by him and then I think John chapter 15 really illustrates this there is no greater love than death that a person would lay down his life for the sake of his friends now obviously it says that the sake of his friends which is obviously um not Agape it's not unconditional love but again it's showing what love means that entails some kind of sacrifice it's not about being selfish indulging your own desires and Pleasures wants and needs it is this kind of selfless sacrifice for others um a great quote here from John that God is love whoever lives in love lives in God and God in them so the idea that when you live a life of love you are living in God and God is living in you so that would be great support for situation ethics why you should base your life on love because it says God is love and if you live in love God lives in you through really illustrating the importance of love in a Christian's life although you could respond by saying is that enough is it just enough to have love and Colossians says above all be loving through again the idea that you know doing the most living thing is the priority that it is axiomatic that love should be the predominant see an Impulse because above all you should be loving this ties everything together perfectly really nice quote there I think Paul writes in Corinthians and now these three remain faith hope and love but the greatest of these is love so again the idea that love should be the absolute priority for Christians it should be your number one priority it's your number one duty it is modeled by Jesus it is shown by Jesus and then you should put that into practice as your priority in the way you live your life and in your moral decision making again a really famous quote used at weddings um from Corinthians here love is patient love is kind it does not envy it does not boast it is not proud it does not dishonor others it is not self-seeking and again that's very important this idea it's an unconditional love you're not doing what's going to be the most loving thing for you necessarily it's got to be selfless that's what Agape is all about and it is not easily angered it keeps no record of wrongs and then finally really important from Mark chapter 12. love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength the second is this love your neighbor as yourself there is no Commandments greater than these so the idea that Jesus himself not only models love in you know his healing and his kindness and then his death for others but then he also explicitly teaches that love is superior to all the other rules and all the other teachings there is no commandment greater than these to love your neighbor as yourself and of course that is known as the Golden Rule so you might want to pick a couple of those quotes that you could use within an fa to show your examiner that you do understand you know the foundations of situation ethics in the New Testament in the life and teachings of Jesus who is the key role model for Fletcher who is the key example for Fletcher in terms of what it actually means to live a life of love and to do the most loving thing in each situation you know Jesus healing on the Sabbath for example he was prepared to break the rules of the day to do the most loving thing which was to help somebody to heal somebody so you know lots of Great Links you can make to scripture when it comes to talking about situation ethics so very quickly before we get on to his four presuppositions I want to mention to you Fletcher's view of conscience because this really helps you to understand his idea of situation ethics out of this very individualistic approach to moral decision making and he interestingly sees the conscience as a thing that you do rather than a thing that exists so it's as he says a um he sees it as a verb rather than a noun so let me unpack this for you I know it sounds like I'm gonna start doing an a-level English language lesson now but let me just share this quote with you he says the traditional error lies in thinking about conscience as a noun instead of a verb so he rejects the idea that the conscience is a thing he says instead that it's something we do he said this reflects the fixity and establishment mindedness of all law ethics have contrasted to love ethics and I love that quote that he's contrasting law ethics with love ethics his theory is very much one of Love ethics of course it is and he's very critical of you know the rigid nature and the legalistic nature of what he calls the law ethics there is no conscience he says a very dramatic bold claim isn't it conscience is merely a word for our attempts to make decisions creatively constructively fittingly and I think the reason he says this is because he doesn't want you to think there's like a voice of God in your head telling you exactly what to do in each situation you've got to follow this rule you've got to do this thing because of course the Fletcher the only Universal is love and so for him conscience is not about having this direct line of communication where God is telling you in this situation you've got to do exactly this because of this Rule and this law he is saying that actually conscience is a process it's an attempt to make decisions and I think that reflects his view that every um moral issue with relative you know that love is the only Universal and then in each case you've got a workout creatively constructively and fittingly what is the right thing to do so there isn't this little um as I say voice of God in your head telling you exactly what to do but instead you've got the autonomy you've got the individual responsibility to work out to roll up your sleeves and make that decision to make that judgment based on the circumstances based on the unique particular situation that you are in and I think very importantly here his ideas of the four presuppositions which we are going to talk about now so just keep that in mind no pun intended when we're talking about the conscience as we do move through in terms of the Fletcher's view of conscience as this process where each individual is not given this voice where they are told what to do but actually they have to make that decision for themselves he gives the individual complete autonomy and complete responsibility to assess the situation and then to make a judgment on what is the most loving thing to do and of course that's where your I could pay it calculus is going to come in handy as well so you know if he could get that app on the app store soon we'll all be whipping out our phones and putting in the data and finding out what we should do in each situation so these four presuppositions what I'm going to do now is talk you through all four so pragmatism relativism positivism and personalism if you would like to fill in the table um as they go through them then you are very welcome to get the full PowerPoint now the link as it says there is in the description box below or you might want to just get a piece of paper get your notepad out and then scribble a few notes as we do go through them so the first one is pragmatism and pragmatism is based on the idea that situation ethics is about seeking practical Solutions so when you hear the word pragmatism all you need to think is practical it is that easy to remember it's just a fancy way of saying do the most practical thing don't stick to a set of rigid rules and expectations but roll up your sleeves and do the most practical thing and we can link this to William James who we've met when we spoke about religious experiences because he was a pragmatist um and he said a pragmatist turns his back upon fixed principles and pretended absolutes so when it comes to situation ethics we turn our back upon fixed principles so for example the five Prime primary precepts of natural moral law we don't need to stick to them we need to roll up our sleeve and seek out a practical solution that actually works in the real world now I've put there that it is actually quite similar to utilitarianism and the principle of utility the idea of doing whatever is most useful yeah this idea that ethics should be about doing the most useful thing um but I think that is quite a tenuous links you might not want to make a big deal of that shall we say but I'm just trying to help to sort of compare these ethical theories and get a sense of things that they might have in common and then we'll also look at differences but yeah the first presupposition is pragmatism the situation ethics is all about seeking the most practical solution for each situation the thing that will work rather than just sticking to the Norms sticking to the Traditions sticking to the rules uh second one then is relativism and this is simply the idea that reality should be relative to the facts of the particular situation to of course you know um as I've put here in the quote the situationist is going to avoid words like never do this or this is the perfect way to approach this situation always do this or you know the teachings are complete and you are going to avoid them as you avoid the plague that is what Joseph Fletcher said because you always believe that morality is relative to the facts of the particular situation that you find yourself in and of course Fletcher believes that love is the only Universal and then you should apply that to each situation so beyond love there are no absolutes everything is relative and it's Peter vardy said it all depends if a well-used word actually it's a phrase pizza but let's not dwell on that um used by a situationist so what he's saying there is a situation is he's always going to say Well it all depends on the situation morale is always relative to the fact of the particular situation so when you're thinking is that the right thing to do should you do that the situationist is going to say it all depends on the particulars of that situation you can't make that judgment in advance you have to be in the moment in the situation deciding what works in that situation so you know building on pragmatism and saying morality is then relative to the facts of that particular situation you find yourself in positivism then okay a little bit more complex now so this is the idea um that belief in a god of love is what we call poverted so it is proposed and then it is supported so like and sound to say like Anthem who divides the ontological argument Fletcher believes that faith comes first so we have to have faith in a god of love that is not something that needs to be proven before we believe it we need to put our faith in a god of love and then because we have a belief in the supremacy of love because of this we then reason out what supports that love in the situation that faces us so positivism is the idea that Christian ethics should be Faith working through love so again you put your faith in a god of love which tells you about the supremacy of love and then you reason out what will support that love in the situation that faces you but this is probably the most religious element I would say of the entire Theory the idea that faith comes first that Christian ethics should be Faith working through love and the idea that it's built upon belief in a god of love who becomes incarnate in Jesus Christ who then shows us Agape in the New Testament and a great quote of course from the Gospel of John that God is love okay your fourth and final um presupposition is not pragmatism I don't know why it says pragmatism there it should say personalism I do apologize big error big mistake if you do download the PowerPoint that will be corrected but please do ignore that I am very embarrassed right now so personalism situation ethics puts people at the Center of Concern people and I love this line people are to be loved not rules you should prioritize people over the rules and Joseph Fletcher said this and drop the legalists love of Law and accept only the love of law I mean a love of law of Love excuse me that is your key killer quote I love that drop the legalist love of Law and accept only the law of love you know legalists love their laws they love the laws more than they love people so they stick to the Lord and they talk about the Lord but they don't then actually apply love in the real world the only thing that they love are the laws and so he says whereas a legalist asks what does the law say the situationist asks who is to be helped and I think one of the best examples of why situation ethics is about personalism is this line here God became incarnate in a person Jesus Christ so we've just said when we spoke about positivism the situation ethics is all about this idea that you have faith in a god of love and then that God of love becomes incarnate in the world as an act of love in order to teach each love to demonstrate love to exemplify love in the person of Jesus Christ who then becomes the key role model for those who follow situation ethics and so personalism again as it should say that should say that I do apologize is all about the fact that situation ethics puts people at the Center of Concern rather than rules because people are to be loved not ruled so drop the legalist love of Law and accept only the law of Love okay so there are your four presuppositions now what we need to move on to next are what we call the sixth working propositions so the presuppositions as they say are like the pillars that underpin situation ethics whereas the working propositions are then about how it's applied so we've looked at the foundations that underpin and hold up this idea of situation affects but now we're going to take a look at how situation ethics actually work in practice and this is where the six working propositions come into it so we're going to talk through them and we're gonna again if you would like to fill in this table so you know you are very welcome to get a copy of the PowerPoint print off the slides and then you can fill within as we go through and hopefully there are going to be no more tongue twisters on the slides and there are going to be no more mistakes on the slides but hey let's all say a little prayer let's manifest it so let's get started shall we your first working principle is that love is the only absolute it's this idea that love is intrinsically good and your key quote there is from Fletcher that only one thing is intrinsically good namely love nothing else at all so in situation ethics we have these key principle that the only intrinsically good thing is love nothing else love is the only principle that is good and right in every situation whatever is loving is right and again I have to mind you it's about Agape it's not about Eros it's not about your love for Tick Tock it's not about your love for Toblerone it's about this unconditional Selfless Love demonstrated by Jesus um it is the one regulative principle of Christian ethics so again we can go all the way back to William Temple you know it is axiomatic that love should be the predominant Christian impulse and then Fletcher himself saying love is the only Universal love is not something we have but something we do remember when Fletcher said that love is Justice distributed it is not a feeling it is something that we do um again quite familiar to this idea of conscience as well isn't it and he says the situationists hope that whatever is the most loving thing in the situation is the right and good thing it is not exclusively evil it is positively good so there is your key core belief in situation ethics that whatever is the most loving thing in the situation is the right and good thing and again the agape calculus is what Fletcher offers us to work that out in each situation and remember the theory is founded upon relativism and the idea that morality is dependent on the circumstances so there is no um guidelines Beyond do the most loving thing because it's always going to be relative to the particulars of the situation you're in okay our second principle then is that Christian decision making is based on love so this is a key quote from Fletcher that the ruling Norm of Christian decision making is love nothing else so it is Love Alone that is always the right thing for a Christian to use when making their moral decisions and of course as Fletcher said let's see if I can actually say it correctly this time drop the legalists love of Law and accept only the law of love so drop the legalist love of Law and accept only the law of Love there you go great tongue twister great vocal warm-ups if anyone's also doing a level theater studies so love employees law when it seems worthwhile otherwise love can break any or all of The Commandments because remember love is superior I think Paul wrote the greatest of these is love love is superior love is more important to any law any commandment any precept any other principle because love is the ruling Norm of Christian decision making and so if you know if the Commandment following the Commandment will lead to the most loving outcome then yeah follow the Commandment but you shouldn't be following it deontologically it should always be teleological you should always be thinking will this lead will follow in this commandment lead to the most loving outcome and if it will then absolutely follow that commandment but if it won't don't think twice before abandoning it and breaking it and now I've noted here a quick ao2 consideration for you because we could consider is Love Actually the only thing a Christian should consider when making their moral decisions what about for example all the other rules and laws in the Bible there are over 600 rules in the Bible for example and or what about the other teaching from other sources of wisdom and Authority so if you think about you know all the teachings and the catechism of the Catholic church for example is it right that you should just abandon thousands of years worth of ethical thinking from the church to just do the most loving thing based on your own personal judgment in that particular situation um and so actually if you think about a Christian so thinking as they say about paper two sources of wisdom and Authority you know what does it mean to make a moral decision as a Christian should you not be Consulting the Bible should you not be Consulting the church teachings you know and thinking right what are the laws here should I really be prepared to abandon all of those teachings and all of those laws and rules to make my own decision about what is loving in this particular situation it certainly gives a lot of autonomy to the individual that is for sure and that is why the Catholic church is not impressed at all and you will not be surprised to hear okay your next one then is that love and just these are the same so again we're thinking a bit more about what do we mean when we say do the most loving thing um and so Fletcher said love and Justice are the same for justice is love distributed nothing else love becomes Justice love in society has to be calculating careful prudent and distributive in caring for all and that is justice so if we are loving we will do the most just thing we will do the right thing there will be Justice if we do the most loving thing because Fletcher says love and Justice are the same they're two sides of the same coin I suppose you could say so we believe that Justice is the many sidedness of love so love is not just one-to-one it's not just from one person to another and reciprocated love is in international Affairs it's in trade treaties it's in un policy and the like so again we need to talk talk about love of neighbors not neighbor remember for Fletcher Agape is the love he is discussing it is unconditional Selfless Love for all people rather than this personal preference because you like somebody or you know you like what they're wearing or because you know them you're friends with them or their family so he says love and Justice need to be reunited because Justice is nothing more than love working out its problems and he says justice is simply Christian love using its head calculating its duties and obligations now I think that's interesting because we often associate love with the heart don't we and we talk about there being this difference between The Head and the Heart but actually by talking about love and Justice being the same Fletcher is bringing together The Head and the Heart because he's seeing love and Justice as two sides of the same coin that Justice is Christian love using its head calculating its duties and obligations now talking of calculating Fletcher then and propose if the Agape calculus and this is the idea that you can actually calculate what the most loving thing to do will be and this reflects his idea of the conscience being this process and this procedure if you like and he as I say is inspired by Jeremy Bentham and his version of this for ACT utilitarianism the philosophic calculus he creates the Agape calculus so here it is for you as I say it is parallel to Jeremy Benson's version which is used in his act utilitarian ethics and by which he proposes we can work out which action will bring about the greatest happiness for the greatest number but of course um for Fletcher he is replacing happiness he's replacing pleasure with love so what does the calculus take into account it takes into account as you know from your studio utilitarianism these seven areas duration intensity propping oh my gosh guys artsy club's Pizza I don't think I've ever been unable to say that word as as terribly as today propinquity there we go I think oh my gosh I actually think I need a doctor and extend certainty Purity and vicinity so you have got to consider so I want you to think about whether this is practical First of all so let's have an ao2 moment do you think in every single situation a Christian faces they should go never mind the laws never mind the rules let me get my Agape calculus out how long will the love last how intense will it be how near or remote will it be how widely will it cover how probable is it how free from pain is it and will it lead to further love there we go done decision mate so just be thinking as I say taking ao2 moment is this practical is this actually going to work in practice but certainly in terms of the theory behind situation ethics the theory is that deciding what is the most loving thing to do can be achieved using this Agape calculus considering these seven factors and by answering those questions you will be able to make your decision about what the most loving thing to do is so flat shirt you know if I suppose being helpful here providing us with this application which actually helps us to make these decisions you know in each situation I suppose if he's going to say there are no laws you've got to calculate it yourself in each situation it is the least you can do isn't it to give us this calculus to help but actually how helpful is this calculus and can this actually be used in every single situation that you face and one other point I would make is what if I use the calculus and come to a very different conclusion to you you know because it's not like to add two equals four is it when it comes to calculating love so you know how reliable would the calculus be that is something else that maybe you want to consider in terms of your ao2 evaluation okay number not liking and I think this is a really really important one to remember as I say Agape is unconditional and selfless and Fletcher says this love Wills the neighbors good whether we like him or not I think that's very important to remember it is not about oh I love Doritos I love Pringles oh I don't really love hula hoops yeah it's not about this preference based on what you like and as I say in modern society we use the word love a lot as um Fletcher first Agape goes out to neighbors not for our own sakes but for that so let's unpack this let's see what he's got to say he is saying that love is not sentimental it is not like sympathy or affection it is brought about by the human will so remember when you were saying about love and Justice being the same thing it is not this emotional thing that comes directly from the heart it does actually require some use of Reason uh love does not seek out the deserving nor does it make judgments about the people it wants to serve so it shouldn't be based on your feelings of empathy or sympathy it has to be Agape it has to be unconditional and selfless um and as he says Agape goes out to neighbors not for our own sakes um but for that not for their sorry no I will start that again Agape goes out to neighbors not for our own sakes not for theirs really but for golf Christian love is the business of loving the unlovable and I really like that quote Christian love is the business of loving the unlovable so Fletcher is saying that you know when it comes to Wagga pay it's not for your own good it's not to make you feel better you know for those feelings of guilt that you feel to go away it's not even about the other person it's not about feeling empathy for them and sympathy for them it's about God yeah and it's this business of loving the unlovable without expecting anything in return without gaining anything for yourself because it is let me say again selfless and unconditional as demonstrated by Jesus um and so of course love needs calculations so again I think the Agape calculus really demonstrates to us doesn't it that love isn't just some sentimental response or some feeling and which drives you to do something to help others in terms of the Agape calculus that really nicely reminds us that it is something that you are calculating and it's brought about by the human will rather than coming straight from the heart as an instinctive response um and remember love will for Neighbors good whether we like him simple nuts okay number five then love justifies its means remember this is a teleological Theory so it's all about the consequences it's all about the outcomes it's all about the aims um and such as we cannot refuse to do a deed which has a mainly good end just because they entails some evil The end justifies the means and again this is where we see similarity with uh utilitarianism don't we because again utilitarianism is the idea that The end justifies the means Fletcher says what is sometimes good May other times be evil and what is sometimes wrong May sometimes be right when it serves a good enough end depending on the situation of course it depends on the Situation's lecture so love justifies its means The end justifies the means so of course the Catholic Church says that certain things are always intrinsically evil that certain things are in and of themselves bad and wrong and Emmanuel can of course our key deontology oh my gosh I cannot speak today our key uh deontologist I need to lie down our key deontologist there we go I can't say the word says that certain things are in and of themselves wrong so for example he said if you are never Justified to lie even if it's to favor life you'll never Justified to steal even if it's to feed your starving baby and it's from a big multi-billion pound Supermarket if we were applying Camp to the modern world and talking about Tesco um so for situation ethics the end does justify the means yeah only indeed The end justifies the means nothing else and so Fletcher says there are four factors to consider when judging a situation he says number one what end do we think excuse me MacArthur just need some of my ribena honestly uh what end do we seek number two what means do we use to obtain it number three what motive is behind our act and number four what are the foreseeable consequences and so they are the four factors that we need to consider when judging a situation and a quick ao2 note that this is similar to utilitarianism but it is in stark contrast as they say to kantian ethics and this is very much showing you why situation ethics is a teleological ethical Theory because it's saying that only the end justifies the means nothing else in stark contrast to Camp who assess morality on each and every action with situation ethics you're taking a step back and you're saying right what is the outcome going to be what is the aim here what is the end goal here and then how do we get there and as I say the end then justify 5 the means that you use to get there okay and then finally really important one and you know it's not going to come as a shock to you it's that Love's decisions are made situationally not prescriptively so really great quote from Joseph Fletcher is that Love's decisions are made situationally not prescriptively so he says that Jesus in his example in the New Testament was a situationist himself he was prepared to break the laws of the day in order to show AKA pain our key example from Luke 6 is that he healed on the Sabbath so he was prepared to break the rules of the time in order to do something loving to help somebody else Jesus and this is a separate point for an equally important Point did not give any teachings on sex ethics such as contraception homosexuality or sex before marriage given the silent Fletcher says love has to decide in the situation there and then so Jesus didn't teach about these things but what he did teach is that there is no commandment greater than loving your neighbor so Jesus didn't give us specifics on these issues but he did give us a very clear instruction to do the most loving thing and so for Fletcher that is key that loves this decision should therefore be made situationally not prescriptively now again this is in stark contrast isn't it to the Catholic church and the catechism for example which gives very very clear teachings on why contraception is wrong why homosexuality is wrong and why sex before marriage is wrong but for Fletcher Jesus didn't speak about this and therefore we have to focus on what Jesus did speak about which was love and then Jesus's example such as healing on the Sabbath suggests that Jesus was prepared to break the conventional rules and laws of society of the day in order to do the most loving thing in order to show Agape so that is the foundation from the New Testament for Fletcher's thinking here for the sets working principle and so he says whether any form of sex is good or evil depends only on whether love is fully served he says morality is situational not prescriptive and so on the issue of same-sex relationships for example Fletcher would say well if love fully served in this relationship is it loving is the end of the relationship if you like loving and so the morality is situational to that particular couple in their particular relationship rather than being prescriptive and saying that two people of the same gender can never be in a Christian relationship that could be blessed by the church for example in sort of um contrast to this we're going to talk about Barclay who argues that Society needs rules in order to function you cannot just say that everything is based on the situation that you cannot prescribe ethics at all you know he's going to say we do need a prescriptive approach to ethics we do need to give people rules and laws to follow otherwise we're going to end up with absolute chaos we're going to end up with absolute Anarchy okay so we have made it through the four presuppositions and the six working principles if you are still with me then you do deserve a moment to just breathe so you might want to pause the video have a drink have a snack do you know what I mean and then we will continue we're going to look at some applications we're going to look at some comparisons to other ethical theories and very excitingly we are going to look at the strengths and the weaknesses so very quickly what I want you to do is just think about how you might apply situation ethics to these moral dilemmas so I've got six moral dilemmas here for you that you could be confronted with as a Christian hypothetically and you know I want you to think if you were following situation ethics if you were Joseph Fletcher what would you do what would you say if you got the agape calculus out what results you think you would come to so for example a same-sex marriage you know abortion after rape allowing euthanasia stealing to feed your starving child committing adultery or granting a divorce now of those off the top of my head I would say probably committing adultery is the only one situation ethics I cannot fear allowing that I cannot ever see as being justified as the most loving thing to do and but you might disagree with me so do let me know down in the comments you know if you were applying situation ethics to these moral dilemmas thinking about the fact that love decisions are made situationally and that love is the only Universal you know what do you think situation ethics would say about these six moral dilemmas so yeah very interested to hear what you think down in the comments below I just also wanted to take a moment to compare situation athletes with a couple of other theories so natural moral law in situation ethics is a really in interesting one because they are obviously both religious theories they are both Christian ethical theories but they could not be more contrasting you know they really are at the opposite the ends of a spectrum here you know so for example natural moral law is then deontological in application you know it's saying that there are five primary precepts that must always be followed and obviously the unbending absolutism of natural moral law makes it legalistic and inflexible which you know would surely bring Fletcher out in a rash you know that is the absolute opposite of what he believes in when it comes to Christian ethical decision making it is obviously legalistic as it prescribes those five primary precepts and then of course the Catholic Church supports natural moral law and Pope Pius XII was very clear in his condemnation of situation ethics however I did think it was interesting that if you think about that proportionalist development on natural moral law which again the Catholic Church rejects very strongly you could say actually they might have a little something in common you know nothing major but a little something because proportionalism does always take the situation into account and says you know that there are exceptional circumstances when you know there is a proportion of reason to not follow the rule um but of course as I say the Catholic Church disagrees you know very strongly about that um and then also I thought it's interesting to note that Aquinas and Fletcher do you actually see the conscience in quite a similar way both of them see it more as an act you know with Aquinas it's about the use of reason and with Fletcher it's about the process um as an act rather than a thing so they both do seem to see conscience more as a verb than a noun but again I think that's where the similarities end isn't it you know natural moral law is great for critiquing situation ethics because of that contrast in them utilitarianism is an interesting one then because you know both are teleological and consequentially bentham's calculus as we've said inspires Fletchers um and as I said earlier you know situation ethics focuses on pragmatism which I think is quite similar to that principle of utility youthfulness so they're both you know very practical and they're both about the consequences and they both provide a calculus however you know you do then have key differences utilitarianism is secular I think that's a really big difference you could say utilitarianism is more applicable to more people because it doesn't depend as we know about positivism it doesn't depend on belief in God and Benson's utilitarianism is focused on Pleasure and happiness rather than love so it's got that different um key value and then um as we've said situation ethics is positivist it's about faith preceding understanding whereas the utilitarianism is empirically based it's based on the idea that we can observe mankind has placed Earth being placed under two Sovereign Mastiffs Pleasure and Pain and so really interesting to think again about comparing situation ethics with Theory and then finally just for the fun of it I've included cantian ethics I think in terms of your similarities you know as you can see they're non-existent really and County and ethics is extremely deontological can't would say that the end never justifies the means you know he is only interested in each Act um and in the morality of each Act there should be no consideration of the circumstances there should be no consideration of the situation so again make sure you're using your ethical Theory as part of your evaluation you know bring them in where it's relevant to show The Examiner that you've got a really good understanding of the ethical Theory and use them to evaluate each other okay so we are going to do some evaluation now we're going to have a look at a couple of strengths and a couple of weaknesses for the situation ethics so your first strand that I want to give you is that for a Christian it's great because it's grounded in Jesus's key teaching of Agape so situation ethics is grounded in the teaching and example set by Jesus the key bigger as we know the Exemplar in Christianity he is the key Christian teacher he is the reason Christianity exists the entire religion is bounded upon him and he taught very clearly love your neighbor as yourself Jesus taught this Central message that we should love God and love our neighbor there if he said no commandment greater than leave everything else including the law hangs on this kind of love that is taught by him commanded by him and modeled by him in his life but then also in his death and of course we've got particular stories that come back this up so John chapter 8 is the story of the adulterous woman who the Pharisees you know who would be seen as the legalistic people of the day would have stoned in accordance with the law of Moses so again talking about the law and sticking to the law loving the law rather than loving people as Fletcher said Jesus refused to condemn her and told her to sin no more and we can say that love motivated him that he put aside the law in order to do the most loving thing and reflecting the fact that situation ethics is about personalism it's about people loving people rather than loving the law so if you love the law he'd have had a great time stoning away but because he loved people he put people first he showed love he showed compassion and he showed mercy and then Luke fix is the story of Jesus healing on the Sabbath and again this shows that he put people and loved the people over laws and a love for laws so you know we can say this theory is grounded in the example set by Jesus because his key teaching his Golden Rule is love and that is not only taught by him but it's also modeled by him as well if you want to be a Christian then you want to be a follower of Christ don't you so follow in his footsteps and reject the love of Law and focus on living a life of love okay your next strength is that it provides individual autonomy if you think about the Western world today we do live in a world of Independence and you know the individual has been exalted it is all about individualism that is you know a product of capitalism isn't it and the consumerist society that we live in and so you could say it's very compatible with the modern way of thinking about the individual have an autonomous being so situation ethics empowers the individual to make their own decisions in the situations that they encounter who are not just blindly following rules you are empowered to make your own judgments this is in contrast to legalistic approaches which require people to act against their own reason and Emotion by following rules that may not fit the situation or sit right with them and their moral instincts now of course remember situation ethics doesn't just say do what you emotionally want to do it is demanding on you but it is giving you the autonomy at the same time to work it out for your yourself so that you at least understand why you're doing what you're doing rather than just having to do something that completely contradicts your own beliefs because that's the law that you have to follow so it gives you that self-awareness that Independence that autonomy and that Insight uh with situation I think the individual has autonomy as they say to make moral judgments that are appropriate for the circumstances they find themselves in so again it's value in the individual it's empowering the individual it's giving them understanding into why they're doing what they're doing not just because well that's what the law says that's what Thomas thequinas decided in the 1200s and this reflects the idea that God has made humans Imago day in the image of God with the ability to reason and think for themselves and another strength it provides flexibility making it relevant and applicable so you know we could say with natural moral law for example it's now outdated on sex ethics Society has moved on natural moral law is stuck in the past because it is legalistic and inflexible whereas situation ethics because it is so um based on the situation continues to be relevant because it provides flexibility in moral decision making reflecting the complexity of life and the uniqueness of the situations we find ourselves in it can accommodate modern development for example medical advances new understandings of human sexuality and new technologies you know natural moral law can't talk about Tick-Tock it can't talk about Instagram whereas situation ethics can be applied to these situations precisely because it's situational it's relative and it's flexible so it can be applied also to different Societies in different time periods Love Remains the constant and love is still enduring if you think in society today we do still see love as a very important thing we see those who live a life of love you know in a very favorable way it's still seen as a key virtue and that we do admire and we do aspire to have in our lives so we can say it does remain relevant this means situation ethics is applicable in a vast array of circumstances and does not lose its relevance you can't say it's outdated because it's constantly keeping up with the different situations and different time periods because it is so flexible that's in its DNA however we could say in terms of our weaknesses that actually is too much responsibility to individuals it gives the individual complete moral responsibility more than the Bible or the church is you know from paper two sources of wisdom and Authority the Catholic church is not going to be happy about that we could say not only you know is that irresponsible but also it's a heavy burden especially when you always have to show Agape you know you've always got to be thinking of this selfless unconditional love you could say are people actually capable of always doing that but also is it fair to put that burden on them to give them that constant responsibility uh as Barclay says if all men were Saints then situation ethics would be perfect but what we know is that people aren't and we could say it risks people making mistakes or feeling unable to make a decision at all you know you could keep going back to your Calculus because you're not sure if you've made the right decision if everything's on your shoulders you're going to want to get it right rather than just following the law that you know has been tried and tested have you know the best course of action to take in that situation we'd also say it remains open to being misused people could end up serving their own ends and using the autonomy of situation ethics to justify doing so well I thought that would be the most loving thing to do you know how can we ever hold people accountable if their response is always going to be well I thought that would lead to the most loving outcome the end Justified the means I took and we could also say it's impossible to apply across Society it only works for individuals in extreme circumstances so as they say Barclay is not impressed at all he says situation ethics gives a terrifying degree of Freedom he said if all men would think then situation ethics would be perfect but they are not um and if you've studied states of nature Augustine's original sin for example that shows you it doesn't work because we have this predisposition towards sinfulness and selfishness and so you can't just expect people to follow agape and do the most loving thing in every situation because that doesn't necessarily come naturally to them they need laws they need rules people need to have rules otherwise they would be Anarchy otherwise everyone would just be in it for themselves as Barclay says the lesson of experience so actually if we look at the history of humanity of all human societies of all human groups and Gatherings we can see that we need a certain amount of law being the kind of people we are so again states of nature what are humans like human psychology we could say you know it shows us it demonstrates to us we need a certain amount of law not necessarily going overboard and legislating what people have for breakfast lunch and dinner but we need at least some laws in order for society to function and in order for all people or you know the majority of people to be doing the right thing we could also say it's actually impractical we do need those clear rules and laws and Barclays said that situation ethics you know it works for extreme cases perhaps but actually as a normative ethical Theory it isn't going to work you can't just say to the entire world population just do the most loving thing in every situation that's all you need to worry about off you go can you imagine the chaos and the Anarchy um and so Barkley says it is much easier to agree that extraordinary situations need Extraordinary Measures than to think that there are no laws for ordinary everyday life it only worked for extreme cases not everyday life so thinking for example about driving imagine if you just said to drivers the only law on the roads is going to be do the most loving thing off you go so you don't have to follow the red lights you don't have to drive on the right side of the road you don't have to stick to the speed limit you just get your Agape calculus out and think what's the most loving thing for me to do yeah so you know if you start to think about it like that in terms of those everyday mini rules that we all have to follow so that Society will function you start to realize that this just doesn't work that it's totally impractical as Martin writes ethics is on the whole meant to simplify things and to make life easy so for example rules of the road you know these basic rules that we follow because it makes life easy for everybody it saves us from the difficult and often dangerous tasks of making our own judgments if you then say to people in every single situation you have now got to make your own judgment imagine the consequences I don't think anyone would ever leave the house because they'd be unable to make those judgments you know and they'd be unable to function because they'd be too busy on the Agape calculus trying to calculate what they should or shouldn't be doing John Macquarie suggests that because situation ethics is about individuals making individual decisions based on the specific circumstances that they sign them open it is difficult to see how this could be applied across a society so it might be great for extreme circumstances when you should occasionally put the rules aside to do the most loving thing but as they say as a normative approach to ethics this just isn't going to work is it we need some rules not just strict rules about you know um murder and things but as I say those little rules and laws about you know you can't do you you know you can't do this you can't drive on the wrong side of the road we need those we need them so Society will function and of course if you want to critique the teleological aspects of things you could say the end does not always justify the means and of course Emmanuel pants would agree there wouldn't they but William Barclay our key um critic here says there are things which in no circumstances can be right whereas of course situation ethics says that absolutely are so situation ethics says that love is at the only intrinsic good everything else is therefore dependent on the situation and as they say Barkley says actually no there are some things which are just in no circumstances right rape for example you could say so the Catholic Church remember they do reject situation ethics maintains that certain things are intrinsically evil abortion and euthanasia for example are always wrong according to the Catholic church and rape is described as always an intrinsically evil act by the catechism now you could say well you know in situation ethics the Agape calculus would never say that rape is the most loving thing to do um but the point here is you know we look at the point here it's that the end does not always justify the means and you know that is what situation ethics is hypothetically arguing um that the only thing is love and that is a very very loose term isn't it that the only intrinsic God is love is that not open to misuse to abuse to manipulation um and then of course the problem with calculating it is that love could end up justifying things that are not right yeah so he gives the example of breaking up a family relationship in the name of so-called love as something that can never be right so again you know what could this Theory end up justifying where would we end up you know a criticism of utilitarianism is that it becomes the swine ethic you know what kind of things does it justify for example YouTube terrorism could you know justify gang rape for example the greatest pleasure for the greatest number you know think about what could this justify what is loving you know obviously if you are applying Agape very strictly it's got to be that unconditional Selfless Love but how many people as we've said are actually capable of consistently applying that in their ethical and moral decision making and so that is it from me today any questions you have do you let me know in the comments thanks for watching and goodbye