Scholars To Scatter

Question 1

William Barclay

Answer 1

Argument:
Situation Ethics gives too much autonomy.

Point:
Humans are not morally mature enough to handle the freedom Fletcher gives; laws are necessary to prevent corruption.

Example:
Barclay says “man has not come of age” and compares Fletcher’s theory to dangerous individualism.
Challenge/Support: Challenge – Situation Ethics risks chaos and selfishness due to the fallibility of human nature.

Question 2

J.A.T. Robinson

Answer 2

Argument:
Humanity can handle moral autonomy.

Point:
Humans are more civilised and rational than in the past and can be trusted to act out of love without rigid rules.

Example:
Influenced by Bonhoeffer’s idea of a “world come of age.”
Challenge/Support: Support – Situation Ethics is viable in modern, mature societies.

Question 3

Canada 1969 Police Strike

Answer 3

Argument:
Removing rules leads to moral collapse.

Point:
When law enforcement disappeared, society quickly became lawless.

Example:
Crime soared during the police strike.
Challenge/Support: Challenge – Demonstrates the need for legalistic structure over individual moral autonomy.

Question 4

Stanford Prison Experiment (Zimbardo)

Answer 4

Argument:
Power corrupts without moral boundaries.

Point:
People quickly abuse power and lose their moral compass in unregulated environments.

Example:
Participants became sadistic when given authority.
Challenge/Support: Challenge – Supports Barclay’s argument that freedom without laws leads to immorality.

Question 5

Lord of the Flies (Golding)

Answer 5

Argument:
Without rules, society descends into chaos.

Point:
Illustrates the regression of civilised children into savagery without external controls.

Example:
Children form violent tribes when left to themselves.
Challenge/Support: Challenge – Warns against removing legal and moral boundaries, as Situation Ethics does.

Question 6

Richard Mouw

Answer 6

Argument:
Fletcher cherry-picks Jesus’ teachings.

Point:
Jesus gave many commands, not just to love; Situation Ethics ignores the full moral message of Christ.

Example:
Jesus speaks about many rules (e.g., about marriage, prayer, commandments).

Challenge/Support:
Challenge – Situation Ethics doesn’t authentically reflect Jesus’ full ethical teaching.

Question 7

Pope Pius XII

Answer 7

Argument:
Christian ethics must follow all commandments.

Point:
Jesus did not cancel the moral law; He reaffirmed the importance of keeping commandments.

Example:
References to Matthew 19:17 and John 14:15 about keeping God’s commandments.

Challenge/Support:
Challenge – Fletcher’s theory is unfaithful to Christ’s teaching and risks moral relativism.

Question 8

Romans 3:8

Answer 8

Argument:
The Bible rejects doing evil for good outcomes.

Point:
Condemns consequentialist ethics; “Let us do evil that good may result” is condemned.

Example:
Direct rebuke of the idea that the ends justify the means.
Challenge/Support: Challenge – Undermines Fletcher’s claim that a loving end can justify any action.

Question 9

Sola Scriptura (Lutheran view)

Answer 9

Argument:
Ethics must be based on the Bible alone.

Point:
Fletcher ignores biblical commandments by prioritising love over divine law.

Example:
Commands like “Do not kill” and “Do not commit adultery” are non-negotiable in Scripture.
Challenge/Support: Challenge – Situation Ethics fails as Christian ethics by disregarding the full authority of Scripture.

Question 10

Mark 12:31

Answer 10

Argument:
Agape is central to Christian ethics.

Point:
Jesus says the greatest commandment is to love your neighbour as yourself.

Example:
Jesus summarises the Law with love of God and neighbour.

Challenge/Support:
Support – Fletcher uses this to justify prioritising love over rules.

Question 11

Exodus 20:13

Answer 11

Argument:
Commandments are absolute.

Point:
“You shall not kill” is a direct, non-relative command from God.

Example:
Fletcher’s suggestion that killing can sometimes be moral (e.g., crying baby example) opposes this.

Challenge/Support:
Challenge – Contradicts the moral absolutes given in the Bible.

Question 12

John 14:15

Answer 12

Argument:
Following Jesus means obeying commandments.

Point:
Jesus links love for Him with obedience to His teachings.

Example:
“If you love me, keep my commands.”

Challenge/Support:
Challenge – Suggests Fletcher cannot claim to follow Jesus if he rejects His moral commands.

Question 13

C. Hitchens

Answer 13

Argument:
Agape is still subjective.

Point:
How we love ourselves and others is variable and can be distorted.

Example:
A Nazi might think it loving to kill themselves if they found out they were Jewish.

Challenge/Support:
Challenge – Even agape can be twisted by personal perspective, making Fletcher’s ethics unstable.