Which type of ethical reasoning compares claims and warrants of a particular case with similar cases?

The correct answer is casuistry, as this approach specifically focuses on comparing and analyzing the details of a particular case with other similar cases to draw ethical conclusions. It emphasizes practical reasoning and often relies on precedent to determine the best course of action by looking at the nuances and context of each individual situation.

In contrast, the other ethical frameworks address morality in different ways. Deontological ethics is based on adherence to rules and duties, prioritizing the inherent rightness or wrongness of actions rather than their outcomes. Utilitarianism evaluates the morality of an action based on its overall utility or the consequences it produces, striving for the greatest good for the greatest number, which does not involve case comparison. Virtue ethics emphasizes the character and virtues of the moral agent rather than rules or consequences, focusing on developing good character traits rather than drawing parallels between cases.

Thus, casuistry stands out as the approach that actively engages in analyzing specific cases against a backdrop of similar circumstances, making it the correct choice for the question presented.