Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Jesuit-Informed Casuistry and the Role of Principles for Organizational Ethics.Jeffery Smith & Dung Q. Tran - 2023 - Philosophy of Management 22 (1):73-98.
    Contemporary casuistry, informed by a centuries-old intellectual tradition within the Jesuit order of the Catholic Church, characteristically maintains that ethical judgment does not rely on abstract laws, general rules or universal principles. Ethical judgment is formed through a subtle activity of comparing prior, settled cases with the current problem one is experiencing. Judgment on moral matters is therefore thought to be highly context-dependent and requires a sensitivity to the unique facts and social circumstances of each case. This discussion reviews the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Moral Dilemmas in Business Ethics: From Decision Procedures to Edifying Perspectives.Yotam Lurie & Robert Albin - 2007 - Journal of Business Ethics 71 (2):195-207.
    There have been many attempts during the history of applied ethics that have tried to develop a theory of moral reasoning. The goal of this paper is to explicate one aspect of the debate between various attempts of offering a specific method for resolving moral dilemmas. We contrast two kinds of deliberative methods: deliberative methods whose goal is decision-making and deliberative methods that are aimed at gaining edifying perspectives. The decision-making methods assessed include the traditional moral theories like utilitarianism and (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • In Defence of Principles? A Response to Lurie and Albin.Paul Griseri - 2008 - Journal of Business Ethics 83 (4):615-625.
    This article presents a response to a recent article by Yotam Lurie and Robert Albin in which they discuss and present the merits of casuistry as a method for resolving moral dilemmas in business, principally by developing 'edifying' perspectives on the situation, and in doing so highlight the shortcomings of principles (such as the categorical imperative) in generating insights and thereby moral choices. The present article accepts the importance of cases and examples as a source of insight, but argues that (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Principlism, Uncodifiability, and the Problem of Specification.Timothy J. Furlan - forthcoming - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics:1-22.
    In this paper I critically examine the implications of the uncodifiability thesis for principlism as a pluralistic and non-absolute generalist ethical theory. In this regard, I begin with a brief overview of W.D. Ross’s ethical theory and his focus on general but defeasible prima facie principles before turning to 2) the revival of principlism in contemporary bioethics through the influential work of Tom Beauchamp and James Childress; 3) the widespread adoption of specification as a response to the indeterminacy of abstract (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
    		•
  • Particularism for Generalists: A Rossian Business Ethic.J. Drake - 2021 - Business Ethics Quarterly 31 (4):600-622.
    A standard framework for business ethics views the inquiry as an application of major ethical theories to specific issues in business. As these theories are largely presented as being principled, the exercise therefore becomes one of applying general principles to business situations. Many adopting this standard approach have thus resisted the implementation of the most prominent development in ethical theory in recent history: that of particularism. In this article, I argue that particularist thinking has much to offer to business ethics (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Intuition and the junctures of judgment in decision procedures for clinical ethics.John K. Davis - 2007 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 28 (1):1-30.
    Moral decision procedures such as principlism or casuistry require intuition at certain junctures, as when a principle seems indeterminate, or principles conflict, or we wonder which paradigm case is most relevantly similar to the instant case. However, intuitions are widely thought to lack epistemic justification, and many ethicists urge that such decision procedures dispense with intuition in favor of forms of reasoning that provide discursive justification. I argue that discursive justification does not eliminate or minimize the need for intuition, or (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations