Case Studies Methodology in Applied Ethics

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

1 * Assistant Professor, Ethics and Training Center, Islamic Culture and Sciences Research Institute

2 eslami48@gmail.com

Abstract

In Applied Ethics, methodology refers to the method of justification and solution of moral issues. There are three main methods in this area that have risen in contrast to one another: the first method is syllogism which emphasizes the importance of moral theories and their application in justifying moral issues and employs an ascending view; the second method is inductivism which has a particularistic and anti-theory approach and supports a descending view; the third method is principalism, which tries to strike a balance between the two views while maintaining a moderate view towards the application of the major moral theories in practice,  and in this way find a cohesive solution. The topic of discussion in this paper is the second method i.e. inductivism. This method focuses on practical decisions regarding particular cases where the verdict cannot simply be put under general norms. The advocates of this method have formally recognized various forms of induction, the most important and comprehensive of which are as follows: case study or a study of particular circumstances and states, narrative ethics and some expositions of virtue ethics. This article is dedicated to the discussion and study of dedicated case study and tries to show the pros and cons of this approach clearly 

Keywords

References

-  Aristotle. (1378 SH). Nicomachean Ethics. Translated into Persian as: Akhlāq-i Nīkūmakhūs by Muḥammad Ḥasan Luṭfī. Tehran: Ṭarḥ-i No.
-  Arras, J. (2013). Theory and Bioethics, in: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. de. by Zalta Edward N. URL= http://plato. stanford. edu/archives/sum2013/entries/theory-bioethics/.
-  Arras, J. D. (1990). Common Low Morality [Report]. Hastings Center Report, 20 (4), 35-37.
-  Arras, J. D. (1998). A Case Approach, in: A Companion to Bioethics. Kuhse H. and Singer P. Oxford: Blackwell.
-  Beauchamp, T. L. & Childress, J. F. (2009). Principles of Biomedical Ethics. (6th ed.) New York: Oxford University Press.
-  Beauchamp, T. L. (1999). Applied Ethics, in: Philosophy and Ethics: Selections from The Encyclopedia of Philosophy and Supplement. Borcher Donald M. and (ed). Macmillan Libreary Refrence.
-  Bedau, H. A. (2001). Casuistry, in: Encyclopedia of Ethics. (vol. 2). Ed. By Becker Lawrence C. & Becker Charlotte B. Routledge.
-  Dancy, J. (2003). Ethics Without Principles. Oxford University Press.
-  Dancy, J. (2009). Moral Particularism. In: Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Zalta Edward N. URL= http://plato. standford. edu/archives/spr2009/entries/moral-particularism/.
-  Dworkin, G. (2006). Theory, Practice, and Moral Reasoning. in: The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory. By Copp D. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-  Elliott, C. A. (1999). General Antitheory of Bioethics, in: A Philosophical Disease: Bioethics, Culture, and Identity, by Elliott, C. A. New York: Routledge.
-  Fullinwider, R. K. (1989). Against Theory or: Applied Philosophy - A Cautionary Tale. Journal of Metaphilosophy, 20 (3-4), 222-234.
-  Gerwen, J. V. (1996). Three Methods in Applied Ethics: A Critical Review Journal of Ethical Perspectives, (3), 184-193.
-  Jonsen, A. R. (1993). Casuistry, Situationism and Laxity. in: Joseph Fletcher: Memoir of an Ex-Radical, Reminiscence and Reappraisal. Ed. by Vaux, K. Lousiville, KY: John Knox Press.
-  Jonsen, A. R. (1995). Casuistry: An Alternative or Complement to Principles?. Kennedy Inistitute of Ethics Journal. Washington DC, (5), 3.
-  Jonsen, A. R. (2007). Casuistical Reasoning in Medical Ethics, in: Principles of Health Care Ethics. Ed. by Ashcroft, R. E. [et al.] West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
-  Jonsen, A. R. and Siegler, M. and Winslade, W. (1998). Clinical Ethics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
-  Jonsen, A. R. and Toulmin, S. (1988). The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning. Berkeley: University of California Press.
-  Lance, M. and Little, M. (2006). Particularism and Antitheory, in: The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory. By Copp D. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-  Little, M. (2001). On Knowing the 'Why': Particularism and Moral Theory. Journal of Hastings Center Report. 4(31), 32-40.
-  Sunstein, C. (1996). Legal Reasoning and Political Conflict. New York: Oxford University Press.
-  Toulmin, S. (1982). How Medicine Saved the Life of Ethics. Journal of Perspectives in Biology and Medicine. 4( 25), 736-750.
Resources written in Arabic / Persian
-  Eslāmī, Seyyed Ḥasan. (1382 SH). Durūgh-i maṣlehat āmīz. Qom: Būstān-i Ketāb.
 
Send comment about this article
CAPTCHA Image
Journal of Philosophical Theological Research
Volume 20, Issue 1 - Serial Number 75
Articles
March 2018
Pages 94-113

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics