Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Situation Ethics

LET THERE BE LUURRVVEEE
by

Cherie Bridges

on 11 January 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Situation Ethics

Creation a la Joseph Fletcher. Situation Ethics.. The horrible, fiddly names... Relativistic: The OPPOSITE of absolutist...the believe that there are NO universal norms and each situation should be treated independantly.

Consequentialist: Making moral judgements based on the final outcome of the action, the CONSEQUENCES.

Teleological: Concerned with the end GOAL/PURPOSE of an action - which in this case should always be self sacrificing love

NOTE: Situation eithics is ALL of the above. Why did Fletcher reject antinomianism and legalism? hmmm.... Legalism. TO BEGIN. Situation Ethics is based on the one principle - AGAPE LOVE. This is selfless love. Constant love. Unconditional love. AGAPE. AGAPPPPEEEE. What morel action is the most loving? Definition: An attitude that exalts laws above all. Fletcher rejected this because he said it gave people no choice but to follow the rules set for them. Antinomianism Definition: Literally, 'against the law'. And approach which states that people are under NO obligation to follow the laws set for them. The situation will provide the solution, based on a persons conscience. Fletcher rejected this idea also, on the basis that with NO guiding principles, there could well result in MORAL CHAOS. The four WORKING principles... Positivism PERSONALISM RELATIVISM PRAGMATISM Pragmatism:

The proposed course of action must be practical, and be motivated by LOVE. Positivism:

AGAPE provides JUSTIFICATION not proof for an ethical descision. People must accept that acting in the most loving way is the right thing to do. Personalism:

The desire to put people, not laws first. A Christian is commited to love people, no rules and regulations. Relativism:

Each situation is unique. People must respond to agape love in each situation. The belief that circumstances do change the action which would be normally made. The six FUNDAMENTAL principles... 'The ruling norm of any Christian descision is LOVE, nothing else'

(LOVE is the basis of Christian descision making) 'The only thing intrinsically good; namely, LOVE: nothing else at all'

(Nothing is as so purely good as LOVE...'intrinisically' means belonging naturally to or essential to) 'LOVE and justice are the same, for justice is LOVE distributed, nothing else'

(Justice is LOVE at work in the community) 'A loving end justifies the means'

(As the long as the end result is loving, the acts you do to get there are irrelevant) 'Love's descisions are made situationally, not prescriptively'

(people have AUTONOMY- the freedom to make their own descisions, but they must use this responsibly, applying love always) 'LOVE wills the good of others, regardless of feelings'

(people should show love to all, as agape is a selfless love) To review... Four WORKING principles:

personalism, positivism, pragmatism and relativism. AH. These are used to determine if any action is loving. Six FUNDAMENTAL principles:

These are used to determin what the most loving action would be in all situations. OOFT. Biblical evidence.... John 15v13 Galatians 5v14 Mark 2v27 John 5v1-16 Matthew 22v37-39 Luk 6v27 You should be able to note these in the right context, and create relevant links between situation ethics and the biblical teachings given! How is Situation Ethics compatible with Christianity? mh. It IS compatible because... It is modelled on the teachings of Jesus (love your neighbour as yourself)
The idea of putting people first (personalism) is keeping with the actions of Jesus (when he healed on the sabath)
One of the six fundamental principles is 'Only the principle of love provides a reasonable base by which to make judgement of right and wrong' - Jesus and paul agree with this (Galatians 5v14)
'Love wills the good of others regardless of feelings' - the good samaritan example It is NOT compatible because... Situation ethics rejects absolute moral laws like the ten commandments
Situation ethics fails to consider religious teachings such as only have sex within marriage. Situation ethics would allow sex out of marriage if it was based on agape.
Paul stated that love is not the only desirable quality...(fruit of the spirit)
The Pope's rejected situation ethics! Due to it being based on your own ego and desires, rather than faith
Situation Ethics removes god as the ultimate authority in the universe, replacing him with man. The strengths and Weaknesses! Strengths. IT takes into account the situation a person if faced with and so can help make descisions where from a legalistic view, all options are wrong
It allows the person the individual freedom to make descisions for themselfs
AGAPE involves putting others first, which should ensire fairness and justice!
People woul dhave to consider the consequences of their actions before they act
'Personalism' appears to be keeping with the actions of Jesus recorded ion the bible Weaknesses. Many people argue we need rules to avoid issues such as moral chaos
Situation Ethics gives so much freedom to the individual, it may be difficult to decide what action to take
AGAPE love is too subjective to be used practically, as humans are naturally motivated by selfishness rather than love
People cannot accurately predict the conssequences of their actions Is it an adaquate basis for making moral descisions?! YES. Each situation is considered differently unlike absolutist theories where a person has to follow rules
The use of Situation Ethics would encourage people to act selflessly and put others first
You have to consider the consequences of your actions
'Love wills the good of others, regardless of feelings' NO. LOVE is subjective, what is loving to one person would not be to another
People cannot accurately predict the consequences of their actions
AGAPE love is an idealistic theory rather than practicle, as humans are SELFISH. Don't worry. Im thouroughly confused too.
Full transcript