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.
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.
Comments
Post a Comment