Casuistry: Towards a More Complete Approach

There are currently two main approaches to medical ethics: a principle-based approach (principlism) and a case-based approach (casuistry). In this dissertation I argue that casuistry is the more perspicuous of the two approaches. The first portion of my dissertation analyzes the current state of casuistry and argues that, although casuistry shows great promise as a philosophical approach, further clarification and theoretical support are needed before it can become viable in its own right. In the remaining portion of my dissertation I argue that insights taken from the theory of particularism can provide the theoretical support that casuistry is currently lacking. Particularism is a theory which argues that one has good reason to believe that universal and absolute ethical principles do not exist. Rather due to epistemic and metaphysical concerns, ethical reasoning is believed to be intrinsically case-based. After taking several chapters to examine key particularist arguments, I then argue that, contrary to widespread beliefs, particularism can account for useful ethical generalities. I finish by arguing that casuistry and particularism can be used to inform and improve each other, and that their combination offers one of the first full-fledged case-based ethical theories.

Name thesis:degree_name

Ph.D.

Level thesis:degree_level

Dissertation

Discipline thesis:degree_discipline

Philosophy

Grantor

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Year dc:date

2015

Author dc:creator

• Bell, David Q.

Contributors dc:contributor

• James Wallace

• Philosophy

Language dc:language

eng

Identifier

(MiAaPQ)AAI3301102

OAI identifier oai:identifier

oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/87603