Weaknesses of Situation Ethics
Situationism, or situation ethics, is a form of relativism. Its basic component is that no set of rules or foundational principles could ever be used to cover the multitude of moral problems the person faces in the course of life. No act is good "in itself." This is the cardinal claim of all Situationism. One of the founders of Situationism, Joseph Fletcher, argued that moral action must add to the amount of "love" in the world. Any action that increases "love" is considered good and praiseworthy.
Other People Are Reading
-
Complexity
-
Situationism is loaded with problems. One of the more important problems is the understanding of any specific situation. These are usually complex, where two people, or more, bring many unique contributions to a moral problem. Add to that the social, economic, political or moral angles to any specific moral dilemma, and you have a huge complex of ideas and realities to sift through at any one time. Few have this ability and certainly even fewer have the desire to sift through these. In sum, most "situations" will be resolved in favor of habit or prejudice.
External Influence
-
The definition of "love," or even "good and evil" must come from somewhere. For the average person, this might be the dominant culture of television, newspapers or even music. The reaction to a complex situation, therefore, might really just be the dominant culture speaking through the actor. An action is "good" in the sense that the general media culture thinks it is.
-
Definitions
-
What is love? This is the main problem in Fletcher's now famous analysis. In general, he holds that "perfect love" is total unselfishness. In short, it stops at nothing to give whatever the agent has to help others, up to and including his very life, as Christ did. If this is true, then it fails the test of "Situationism," that is, that no act is good "in itself." Unselfish acts are good in themselves if this is the definition of "love." Regardless, this definition of "love" is far too vague to guide behavior. Moral theory given this basis just becomes another variant of consequentialism or utilitarianism.
Moral Foundations
-
Situationism must be relativist. This is because the foundational principle of this school of thought says there are no foundational principles, only unique situations that require unique and situation-specific responses. Among many other dangers, this approach permits agents to act however they please, in full realization of the mind's ability to rationalize and justify nearly anything. Without a strong sense of moral foundation, the person who is really in charge of evaluating an action is only the actor.
-
