Strengths

It’s a rational theory that appeals to both theists and non-believers 

• By focusing on reason (instead of Divine Revelation), it has the potential to be accepted by both theists (who like that it is in keeping with Christian values) and non-believers who agree with the rational argument behind its moral laws 

• Furthermore, some parts of Natural Law (such as the precept on preservation) fit in with Darwinian ideas of survival 

It has a degree of flexibility 

• The Secondary Precepts gives it some flexibility 

• Aquinas viewed the primary precepts are absolute but the secondary precepts are general principles and do not state what to do in a given situation (Aquinas viewed them as imperfect and being refined) ▪ 

• This allows them to be changed over time as we better understand what divine law is 

• Moreover, the Doctrine of Double Effect also allows for exceptions when two goods appear to conflict

Weaknesses

The Naturalistic Fallacy 

• Natural Law Theory argues that what is natural is good.  

• This commits the naturalistic fallacy by moving from an ‘is’ (‘this is how it is natural for humans to behave’) to an ‘ought’ (‘this is how humans should behave’). 

• For example, we may agree that humans are naturally inclined to reproduce, but this does not mean that this is the right thing to do 

Kai Neilson: There is no single ‘human nature’ 

• People are influenced by the society and the culture they grow up in ▪ There is no universal ‘natural’ way of being human. 

Not everyone agrees that we have a purpose 

• Aquinas’ theory assumes that everything and everyone in the world has a purpose. 

• But it can be argued that in order to accept that everything in life has a particular purpose you need to believe in God. 

Martin Luther: Human beings cannot work out what is right and wrong themselves

• Protestant thinkers such as Martin Luther and Karl Barth thought that we need guidance telling us right and wrong 

• They argued that because of the fall of Adam and Eve, humans are too corrupt and sinful to work out ethical rules themselves. They believed that we should get our ethics from the Bible rather than from our own reasoning.

Key arguments/debates 

• Some philosophers see Fletcher’s idea that ‘love is justice distributed’ trending towards a divorce from social context. Integral to its definition is a relativistic understanding of the whole. 

• Others see Fletcher as an active social reformer, questioning discriminatory laws and demanding change: ‘love wills the good of others, regardless of feelings’ and eradicates prejudice and discrimination. 

• Some would see the priority of personalism over against religious rulings as consistent with Jesus’ declaration that ‘Sabbath was made for man not man for the Sabbath’. 

• Others would side with William Barclay, (Ethics in a Permissive Society) and see the nature and function of the law as ‘the distillation of experience’ that society has found to be beneficial 

Key Questions 

• Is Situation Ethics too individualistic for it to work in society? 

• Is Situation Ethics based in extreme examples and so distorted?

• Is Situation Ethics too idealistic to be of any practical use? 

• Does total freedom from religious rules mean ethical anarchy?   

Key Quotes  

“What a difference it makes when love, understood agape, is boss.” (Fletcher) 

“There must be an absolute or norm of some kind if there is to be any true relativity.” (Fletcher) 

“To love Christianly is a matter of attitude, not of feeling.” (Fletcher) 

“Justice is the many-sidedness of love.” (Fletcher) 

Key Quotes - Application 

“Society has a right to protect itself from danger within and without, and not to force a monistic and monopoly standard of personal conduct.” (Fletcher) 

“There is some boundary between personal existence and the social membership. There is some range for private choice and personal taste. ” (Fletcher) 

“What sex probably needs more than anything is a good airing, demythologizing it and getting rid of its mystique-laden and occult accretions.” (Fletcher)

“Whether any form of sex (hetero, homo or auto) is good or evil depends on whether love is fully served.” (Fletcher)