On more than one occasion in my past as an employee or friend or even a family member, I have found myself being “accused” of being an idealist. I am not looking at the situation that I find myself or others in and realizing how it is now, I see it how I want it to be. I know that is true, so very true. I don’t believe in adjusting my principles, actually God’s principles and rules, because of the current situation I am in. I am not pragmatic until I have no choice, until after praying, and I know I have no real choice.

You have now read three ideas in the first paragraph. Here they are and what they mean.

Pragmatism: Pragmatism means thinking of or dealing with problems in a practical way, rather than by using theory or abstract principles.

Idealism: It is the metaphysical view that associates reality with ideas in the mind rather than with material objects. It lays emphasis on the mental or spiritual components of experience and renounces the notion of material existence.

Situational Ethics: It is a combination of idealism and pragmatism if the idealist solution doesn’t work or is too hard. In other words, use the truth unless a lie works better or faster. Also, one should never say never but never say always either. Some define Situational Ethics as a Christian principle. It is not Utilitarian, in other words, it doesn’t believe that there are no moral principles at all, but it does promote the practice that those principles can be compromised if the situation calls for that. For example, lying is not usually the best thing to do in interpersonal relationships but sometimes a lie may be the best thing to use in certain situations. This is a bit simplistic but an example.

A man’s wife asks her husband:

“Does this dress make my behind look big?”

If he loves her then what will he say? I think you get the point of this situation.

A more serious example: suppose there is a traffic accident. A woman is trapped in her car and is injured. She asks a first responder if her husband, who was killed in the accident, is okay. The person being asked knows if they tell her the truth it will upset her greatly, and that could be bad, so the person avoids the blunt truth and says, he is being taken care of. The helper creates the impression that the man is alive without saying so. He or she believes that under the present circumstances, a half-truth is required to keep the situation from getting worse. Ethically the person doesn’t believe in lying but does lie out of concern for the woman.

Situational Ethics is a theory first put forward by the Episcopal priest Joseph Fletcher back in the 1960s. He wrote two books, Classic Treatment, and Situational Ethics, expressing his thoughts in this regard. He believed that moral principles could be set aside in certain situations as long as Christian love was best served at the time. Agape Love is the ultimate law, the guide for all things in life. Selfless love should be practiced at all times. I agree with this but like many other Christian principles, I believe that Situational Ethics has been compromised, and changed, into something not quite based on unselfish love. I suppose my past experiences have led me to that conclusion.

I am not a legalist. I don’t believe in religious absolutes like some folks. I am not a “King James only” kind of guy. I don’t believe in hitting people over the head with spirituality, but I will also not compromise what I know to be true. I will tell people about miracles that have happened to me if the “situation” is called for even if I know they will look at me sideways when I do. I said I would tell them about things God has done, if the situation calls for me to, by that I mean if the Holy Spirit is leading me, inspiring me, to do so. I have learned the hard way that without that inspiration I am wasting my words and time. I basically try to love people, but I struggle to forgive at times, yet I want to be the person that God wants and requires me to be. His Son is our guide to know what that is.

In that regard, I have learned that there are all kinds of people in this world. Some will lie to you and some will die for you. I constantly ask myself which one am I?

I am reminded of a story that I first read in a Dick Francis Novel. The book was called “Decider” and in the book, the protagonist related this riddle: You reach a fork in the road. A sign explains that in one direction is Heaven and Life and the other is Death and Hell. Each path is blocked by an identical Guard. The sign goes on to say that one of the guards will always lie and the other will always tell the truth, it does not say which guard is which. We assume that the guards do know which path leads to where. You may ask one question of only one guard in order that you can determine, with certainty, the way to Heaven. What is that question?

The answer is simpler than you might think. We ask the guard on the left what the guard on the right would say is the path to Heaven. And then take the opposite path, (to what he says).

Why? You ask. If you ask the liar, he will lie about what the truth-teller would say and will point you to the path that leads to Hell. The truth-teller would tell the truth that the liar would point to the path to Hell. So, both guards would point you towards the path to Hell, and so you take the other path, the path to Heaven and Life.

Which path are you on?

A note on this blog website of mine, I hope and believe that many posts here are inspired by God. They come to me in the middle of the night or while reading my devotional book. I read a chapter of Proverbs or Psalms and something from my past fits the words and I feel the great need to put those words down on electronic paper. My hope is that someone will read my post, and think about what they read, and it will help them choose the right path. It is that simple.

Derrick