Skip to main content


Buy Article:

$43.00 plus tax (Refund Policy)


At the heart of the uniqueness debate is the possibility that the computer revolution may demand more in the way of ethical analysis than our traditional (that is, modern) ethical edification has prepared us for. In short, it may present new and unique problems and therefore demand new and unique solutions. In this article I argue that the solution is in fact an old and not-so-unique one: casuistry. Appealing to Jonsen and Toulmin's analysis of casuistry (1988), I argue that a casuistic methodology is a more accurate description of the moral reasoning used by contemporary computer ethicists than are other accounts. In addition, I argue that the strengths that enabled casuistry to deal successfully with radical social, economic, and religious changes in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries render casuistry well suited to the task of dealing with radically new situations like those found in twentieth- and twenty-first-century computer technology. Before concluding, I briefly explore Pascal's fatal critique of casuistry and its relevance for contemporary computer ethics.
No References
No Citations
No Supplementary Data
No Article Media
No Metrics

Keywords: casuistry; computer ethics; information ethics; methodology; moral reasoning; uniqueness debate

Document Type: Research Article

Affiliations: c/o Metaphilosophy, Department of Philosophy, Southern Connecticut State University, 501 Crescent Street, New Haven, CT 06515, USA, Email: [email protected]

Publication date: 01 July 2007

  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more