Casuist ethical theory
is a process of reasoning that seeks to resolve moral problems by extracting or extending theoretical rules from a particular case, and reapplying those rules to new instances? This method occurs in applied ethics and jurisprudence.
Casuistry, or case-based reasoning, does not focus on rules and theories but rather on practical decision-making in particular cases based on precedent. So first the particular features of a case would be identified, and then a comparison would be made with other similar cases and prior experiences, attempting to determine not only the similarities but also the differences.
Principles of casuist ethical theory
Respect for autonomy: respecting the decision-making capacities of autonomous persons; enabling individuals to make reasoned informed choices.
Beneficence: balancing benefits of treatment against the risks and costs; for example the healthcare professional should act in a way that benefits the patient.
Non maleficence: avoiding causing harm; the healthcare professional should not harm the patient. Most treatment involves some harm, even if minimal, but the harm should not be disproportionate to the benefits of the treatment.
Justice: respect for justice takes several forms:
- Distribution of a fair share of benefits
- Legal justice – doing what the law says
- Rights based justice, which deals in the language, and perhaps the rhetoric, of claimed human rights, and hence goes beyond, though it includes, legal rights.
Casuistry and other ethical methods
1) it requires a uniformity of views that is not present in contemporary pluralistic society; (2) it cannot achieve consensus on controversial issues;
(3) it is unable to examine critically intuitions about cases;
(4) it yields different conclusions …
Casuistry departs from ethical approaches that work deductively from rules thought to have clear applications in all circumstances. Casuistry takes rules into account but begins with the moral and practical features of each case.
Casuistry also departs from approaches to ethics that rely solely on good character or virtuous motives. Instead, casuistry demands deliberation about how to put good character and virtuous motives into practice.
Some authors classify casuistry as a subset of applied ethics, or practical ethics. That is the branch of ethics that is concerned with the application of moral norms to practical problems. Others restrict the term applied ethics To deductive reasoning from principles to cases. Accordingly, those authors view casuistry as an alternative to applied ethics.
Like casuistry, “situationism” or “situation ethics” focuses on cases. Unlike casuistry, however, situationism uses no paradigm cases and views principles as, at most, guidelines. Situationism also departs from casuistry by viewing circumstances as unique and isolated rather than as continuous with broader moral experience.
