Casuistry in medical ethics: Rehabilitated, or repeat offender?

For a number of reasons, casuistry has come into vogue in medical ethics. Despite the frequency with which it is avowed, the application of casuistry to issues in medical ethics has been given virtually no systematic defense in the ethics literature. That may be for good reason, since a close examination reveals that casuistry delivers much less than its advocates suppose, and that it shares some of the same weaknesses as the principle-based methods it would hope to supplant.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 9,360
External links
  • Through your library Configure
    References found in this work BETA

    No references found.

    Citations of this work BETA

    No citations found.

    Similar books and articles
    Martin Calkins (2001). Casuistry and the Business Case Method. Business Ethics Quarterly 11 (2):237-259.
    Anders Nordgren (1998). Ethics and Imagination. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 19 (2):117-141.
    Benjamin H. Levi (1996). Four Approaches to Doing Ethics. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 21 (1):7-39.
    Kevin Wm Wildes (1994). Respondeo: Method and Content in Casuistry. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 19 (1):115-119.
    Theo Van Willigenburg (1998). New Casuistry: What's New? Philosophical Explorations 1 (2):152 – 164.

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index


    Total downloads

    13 ( #100,552 of 1,088,905 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    1 ( #69,661 of 1,088,905 )

    How can I increase my downloads?

    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature

    Start a new thread
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.