For research oversight committees, there is a certain appeal to using casuistry as a method, which is why I think we often end up there, even if we start from a more abstract point like the Belmont principles. Casuistry is an intuitive, somewhat concrete way —at least as far as ethics goes— of thinking about problems. When it comes to philosophical instruction (and often limited time to engage in abstract thinking for its own sake), casuistry can provide a nice nexus point between the abstract principles and policies and the practical decisions being made. Read more