The Instigator
A341
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Wylted
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

Situational ethics is superior to absolute ethics

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
Wylted
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/18/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,251 times Debate No: 46162
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (4)

 

A341

Pro

First round is acceptance. Any definitions can be worked out in the comments.
Wylted

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
A341

Pro

I will just state a few definitions before starting.

Ethics will be defined as: "moral principles that govern a person's behaviour or the conducting of an activity.".

Situational ethics is defined as: "Ethical decisions that follow flexible guidelines rather than absolute rules, and are taken on a case by case basis.".

Absolute ethics is defined as: "certain actions are absolutely right or wrong, regardless of other circumstances such as their consequences or the intentions behind them".

I will be arguing that situational ethics is a superior basis for morality.

The right thing to do often depends on the situation for instance: Slavery is often thought of as a moral absolute but what about those few people who bought slaves to free them [1]? You need to put constraints on when slavery is good or bad for instance slavery is bad when you force that slave to work for you or buying another person is bad when you plan to enslave them afterwards. You see absolutes need to have many constraints placed on them and a blanket statement such as "slavery is bad" can never work because there are some situations where slavery could be justified (I have already laid out one of there situations).

So called absolute's can be justified under specific circumstances running through a few:

Killing: In order to save more lives,
Stealing: Intelligence agencies stealing information from other governments,
Terrorism: Fighting to overthrow a dictatorial government (an example would be the american revolution).

The fundamental point is that different actions are moral in different situations as I think I have illustrated.

I look forward to your arguments.

[1] http://www.quakersintheworld.org...
Wylted

Con

Introduction

When I refer to absolute ethics as opposed to situational ethics, I'm referring to the code of ethics given to us by nature. The only way to judge if situational or absolute ethics were superior would be to apply the absolute ethics that is inherent in all of us. My opponent even justifies situational ethics with the use of the unconscious code of ethics he isn't even aware he is using.

What is Absolute Ethics

This is ethics based on some sort of absolute rule or rules. My opponent without even realizing it is promoting absolute ethics. He is using absolute rules to show that certain situations in regards to ethics are different. It seems the absolute rules he is using is; Do the action that results in the least amount of harm.

Summary

My opponent has the burden of proof to show situational ethics are superior to absolute ethics. In order for my opponent to do this he needs to first show that situational ethics is even possible. Him using moral and ethical absolutes to prove situational ethics is useless and contradictory in nature.
Debate Round No. 2
A341

Pro

My opponent has convinced me in regards to this debate please give all seven points to him. (sorry I was a bit of a pushover but I realized my view was far to simplistic).
Wylted

Con

I accept your honorable concession. Thank you. Good luck in future debates.
Debate Round No. 3
A341

Pro

A341 forfeited this round.
Wylted

Con

Moving on.
Debate Round No. 4
A341

Pro

A341 forfeited this round.
Wylted

Con

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by A341 3 years ago
A341
I would use the common definition of ethics "moral principles that govern a person's behaviour or the conducting of an activity.".

Situational ethics is defined as: "Ethical decisions should follow flexible guidelines rather than absolute rules, and be taken on a case by case basis."

Absolute ethics is defined as: "certain actions are absolutely right or wrong, regardless of other circumstances such as their consequences or the intentions behind them"

And yes Pitbull15 if you want another debate sure.
Posted by Pitbull15 3 years ago
Pitbull15
You want another challenge from me? Just asking.
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
Define ethics please. If the definition is appropriate I will accept.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
whiteflame
A341WyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession. I'm not sure why, either. I understand that the arguments of Pro's first round all function under an absolute ethical constraint of utilitarianism, but that doesn't force him to see that as the only ethical standard necessary. He could have talked about deontology and made some good points there about how our absolute code of ethics has made it impossible to address human suffering as a means to an end. Nonetheless, as I don't see it, this is my vote.
Vote Placed by codemeister13 2 years ago
codemeister13
A341WyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Arguments goes to Wylted due to Pro's concession. Con gets conduct for potentially one of the most honorable/honest concessions I've seen on this site.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 2 years ago
Krazzy_Player
A341WyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.
Vote Placed by Actionsspeak 2 years ago
Actionsspeak
A341WyltedTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession