Relativistic Theory of Ethics Essay

One relativistic hypothesis of moral philosophy is situationism. Situationism ( withal known as situation ethics) was devised by Joseph Fletcher, who was strongly against absolutist theories for interpreter legalism and also disliked how religions were taught implying there were approximately sees that could never be broken, as he thought these rules argon too demanding and restrictive. He then created this theory of situation ethics which is seen as the mid way because it lies mingled with antinomianism and legalism. Antinomianism is precise anti law whilst legalism emphasises the primal of law.However, situationism lies between the two as Fletcher was very enthused by making a ending on individual situations. Situation ethics maintains that its the consequences of executions which determine whether an action is set or wrong, so it is very practically a consequentialist position. Situationists enter each end making situation with ethical maxims of their community an d culture, each they treat with respect. Fletcher proposed that non and the situation guides an individual on what they should do but also the principle of gaping ( live).In Fletchers book he suggests that Christians should make the unspoiled choices without blindly adjacent rules but rather by mentation for themselves. Decisions should be made on the touch on basis of one rule agape. such(prenominal) bed involves doing the best social function becomeable for the other party involved. So maxims could be ignored if they dont work on agape, for example if a priest is presented by a young brothel keeper who is having venial promiscuous sex, the right thing to do would be to insist the young lady uses contraception.This is because the most loving thing to do for the other person is to ensure she is safe. For the situationist the rule of agape is always right. Fletcher created 4 running(a) principles which outlined how situation ethics works. The outset one is pragmatism , which states that what you propose mustiness(prenominal) work in practice. Second is relativism, so Fletcher eliminates speech communication like always, never, and despotic. He states there are no objective rules but all decisions must be relative to agape. Thirdly is positivism, which states a value judgement needs to be made, giving the first place to drive in. ultimately in-personism, people are put in first place theology is personal and not centred on laws, this emphasises the idea that morality is relative to situations. Fletcher put forward 6 suggests which also aid the theory. The first proposition is only one thing is intrinsically good namely love postal code else at all Thus, only love is good in itself action arent intrinsically good or abomination. or else they are good or evil dependent on whether they promote the most loving run.Fletcher rejects any statements like criminal conversation is wrong as the circumstances are always different, and sometimes it may be right for adultery to take place. The irregular proposition is the ruling norm of Christian decision is love, nothing else Fletcher claims Jesus replaced the Torah with love, also the Ten Commandments are not unquestioning even Jesus broke them when love demanded it. Love replaces law. The third proposition is that arbitrator will follow from love, because justice is love distributed. If love is put into practice it finish only result in justice.quartern is that love has no favourites and does not yield whom we like preferential treatment. Love wills the lives whether we like him or not The fifth fundamental principle, love must be the final end, not a means to an end. For Fletcher, the end must be the most loving result. Finally the sixth proposition is that the most loving thing to do will depend on the situation and since situations differ, you cant severalize an action will be right in every situation. Fletcher, the good result is that which serves agape love best. Any action that leads to that end is right.