Trading Honesty & Integrity for Situational Ethics: Utter Selfishness

Honesty and integrity are values esteemed by all value loving entities. These values are highly sought after, though they’re quickly becoming extinct in the present day society. Our society has succumbed to moral decadence, and those responsible for modeling morality have adopted a hands off approach towards eradicating the menace.

The truth is, instead of nurturing wholesome children, we’re bringing up children with twisted moral values. Kids that are slowly and unknowingly substituting integrity for popular culture and wisdom for cheap lies. And what do we get?  Depraved-pathological-little-witty-liars, who’re celebrated for being *smart*. They don’t see any wrong in breaking all the rules, and getting their little selves into all manner of adventure. After all, their *wit* will unfix them in case someone demands accountability. Folks we’ve lost it; we need to re-focus.

"So how do situational ethics arise here?" You ask. Important to note is, we live in an imperfect world where *situational ethics* are mostly employed to serve self-interests.

[Let me illustrate a case of a modern society situational ethics involving a kid – A kid says, “My parents can never approve of this, but I will go ahead and do it because I can’t deny myself this kind of fun.” The situation then arises when his parents inquire. So what happens? The kid understands telling the truth will hurt his parents, so he takes the familiar route of lying. A little witty-lie gets him off the hook. Eventually, 'deliberate breaking of rules to get what he wants, and then fixing the situation with lies to avoid hurting his parents' becomes his lifestyle.]

The intent of situational ethics according to its initiators was to serve love, but in modern times *situational ethics* mostly accompany self-interest.        

Origin of Situational Ethics

Situational ethics originated from the argument that all other moral principles can be overlooked if the intention is to serve love. Fundamental moral principles are placed on a scale and a new principle is introduced, “A loving end justifies the means.” Whenever I think about this principle many questions run through my mind: - Don’t fundamental principles have instructions on how we ought to love? Why do the ‘means’ have to be justified? Do the ‘means’ happen in a vacuum? Are people involved when the ‘means’ are taking place? Are there already existing structures when the ‘means’ take place? What happens to the people involved and the structures when the ‘means’ are taking place?

How can we justify relaxing/bending or even breaking of moral laws to achieve a good end? How do we even fit this in the context of love? The originator of situational ethics could have envisioned a different outcome but the actual application of situational ethics in an imperfect world sparks off not-so-good scenarios.

Putting it in plain text, I would say – overlooking a fundamental principle no matter how much we sugar coat it, is disobedience.

Fate of Situational Ethics

As we all know, Satan’s judgment was pronounced before the beginning of age, and punishment was prescheduled to take place after the end of age. To kill his boredom, he occupies himself misleading as many people as he can. [Could he be the author of the popular lines, “I can’t go down alone,” – Judge for yourself.] He achieves his objective by twisting God’s truth to fit his situation and wishes, hence the title ‘father of lies’.

Apparently, people were not going to break moral laws on the platform of love forever. They may have sugar coated it on the pretext of wisdom, but someday the pioneer of disobedience was bound to catch up with them. Eventually, he did and the situation has deteriorated to a point where it looks natural to employ any means available to achieve what you want, and then throw in little lies to cover up the wrongs/fix the situation. And majority of people seem so comfortable and lost in it, they barely see the damage our moral fabric has sustained as a result of this.

Situational Ethics in Present Day Society

Can an insightful and wise person answer me please – has the meaning of ‘honesty or integrity’ as defined in the moral dictionary changed in the modern world dictionary?

If yes, then we’ve lost connection with our source. The danger looming in such eventuality is worse than the possible danger facing an aircraft that has lost connection with the control tower.

If no, then agree with me there is a dire need to overturn tables and reverse the consequences of misusing situational ethics. To renew the moral fabric, we need to get the combination right; it’s not popular culture + wit + lies but integrity + wisdom + honesty. While the former is easy and cheap, we’ve to get out of our comfort zones, toil and nurture the latter combination for you can never go wrong with this.

Effects of Trading Honesty & Integrity for Situational Ethics

Situational ethics is not only referred to in a true or false scenario, but even when you consider the entire scope of application of situational ethics, honesty/integrity issues never miss on the picture, not to mention the degree of selfishness involved. As a matter of fact, if you weigh what I call popular-modern-situational-ethics, it leans more on the PR side than love side. It’s either one wants to look good, get some favors or to avoid trouble; selfishness so to speak.

It’s the ripple effect of dishonesty –lapse in integrity that has fanned the flames, which are now threatening to consume our society’s moral fabric.  

For instance, you celebrate lies of a little child camouflaged in wit, told to conceal a blunder, thinking, “waoh, what a smart kid?” without realizing you’re nurturing selfishness in that kid. When matured, selfishness is like an intense bush fire that consumes both the dry and green, old and young. It lays a foundation for greed and all manner of wickedness.

What are we doing raising people with twisted and shaky moral foundations? People who believe the end justifies the means; people who are prepared to do anything to achieve what they want. Mischievous people who are ready to defend mischief as long as it brings them good? Isn’t that setting up a man eat man kind of a society? In that case then the jungle would be friendlier than the human society because beasts abide by the rules of the jungle. Then we’ll have discredited God who formed us in his likeness (read – kind, loving, merciful, forgiving, compassionate, generous, gracious, righteous, in short, he is everything good.)

Conclusion

When the foundation is destroyed sooner or later everything else caves in. Champions of situational ethics base their argument on biblical teachings of Christ on love as the greatest commandment.

Christ’s Teaching: The greatest commandment is; Love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind and strength and the second is; love your neighbor as you love yourself.  

However, this teaching cannot support the notion that ‘a loving end justifies the means’. Why? because breaking fundamental principles amounts to disobedience regardless of the intent. Disobeying fundamental principles of morality intended to safeguard humanity against self-destruction amounts to disobeying the author of humanity (God). Consequently, the command to love God with all your heart, mind and strength is compromised.  So you cannot break the first commandment to fulfill the second (love for neighbor). The order is very important; relaxing the first commandment to get the second right is not justifiable.

Integrity and honesty are not substitutable. It’s either we champion and practice them or we contend with a worn out moral fabric.