Juristic Casuistry

Juristic Casuistry is a method of legal reasoning within Early Modern Legal Thought that resolves particular moral and juridical dilemmas by applying general legal principles to specific cases through a systematic analysis of circumstances, distinguishing itself from abstract jurisprudence by its case-based, context-sensitive approach to legal judgment.

16

Publications

511

Citations

20

Authors

9

Institutions

Publications per year

2017–2026

1

Authors

20

  1. WP
    William Perkins

    Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, United States

    1 publications · 32 citations

    1

    h-index

  2. IH
    Ian Hunter

    The University of Queensland, Australia

    1 publications · 54 citations

    1

    h-index

  3. BJ
    Baber Johansen

    École des hautes études en sciences sociales, France

    1 publications · 35 citations

    1

    h-index

  4. IS
    Isher‐Paul Sahni

    University of New Brunswick, Canada

    1 publications · 12 citations

    1

    h-index

  5. ER
    Elliot Rose

    1 publications · 37 citations

    1

    h-index

1–5 of 20

Venues

  1. The American Historical Review

    AHR · 2 publications · 51 citations

    2

    h-index

  2. Metamedicine

    2 publications · 89 citations

    2

    h-index

  3. Renaissance and Reformation

    1 publications · 14 citations

    1

    h-index

  4. Islamic Law and Society

    1 publications · 35 citations

    1

    h-index

  5. Grotiana

    1 publications · 54 citations

    1

    h-index

1–5