Respondeo: Method and content in casuistry

Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 19 (1):115-119 (1994)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

James Tallmon has argued that my criticisms of Jonsen and Toulmin are ill founded. Tallmon argues that Jonsen and Toulmin argue for a method of rhetorical reasoning and not for a particular content. He argues that if one distinguishes the content and method of casuistry the Jonsen-Toulmin model can work. But Tallmon, like Jonsen and Toulmin, cannot escape the need for casuistry to have a content. Tallmon's response evidences that need since he assumes that there is a ‘Medical Community’ which has a moral vision. Keywords: casuistry, content, Jonsen, method, rhetoric, Tallmon, Toulmin CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this?

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,733

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-24

Downloads
32 (#699,031)

6 months
7 (#681,649)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Kevin Wm. Wildes
Loyola University, New Orleans

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references