From the case-based moral reasoning of medieval and early modern Catholic moral theology, with roots in Cicero and the Stoics, revived by Albert R. Jonsen and Stephen Toulmin (The Abuse of Casuistry, 1988).
Reasons about a hard moral case by comparing it with clear cases whose verdicts nobody disputes, building judgment from cases upward.
When to reach for it
When principles conflict on an ethical question and stating the rule does not settle what to do.
How it runs
- State the facts of the case and who is involved.
- Find clear paradigm cases of right and wrong nearby.
- Name the features that make each paradigm clear.
- Compare the case with each paradigm, feature by feature.
- Judge by the closer paradigm and note what tips it.
Where it sits in SOLVE eX
Go to the source
- The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning, 1988