Problem: Background: Inzamam-ul-Haq ( pronunciation ;Punjabi, Urdu: nDmm lHq; born 3 March 1970), also known as Inzy, is a former Pakistani cricketer, and former captain. He is the leading run scorer for Pakistan in one-day internationals, and the third-highest run scorer for Pakistan in Test cricket. He was the captain of the Pakistan national cricket team from 2003-07 and is considered to be one of the best leaders in Pakistan Cricket history. Inzamam rose to fame in the semi-final of the 1992 Cricket World Cup.
Context: Inzamam made his (ODI) debut in a home series against West Indies in 1991, and made a good start to his career by scoring 20 and 60 runs in two matches against West Indies. This was followed by 48, 60, 101, and 117 runs against Sri Lanka.  Handpicked by former Pakistan captain Imran Khan for the 1992 Cricket World Cup in Australia and New Zealand, 22-year-old Inzamam was relatively unheard of before the tournament. To the surprise of many he was persevered with throughout the tournament, coming in at various positions in the batting line-up, despite not being very successful early on. Yet it was his performances at the most crucial stage of the competition that made fans and summarisers take note. Inzamam rose to fame in Pakistan's dramatic semi-final against New Zealand at Auckland. With his side in a precarious position, chasing 262 against an impressive New Zealand side, he hit a fiery 60 run innings from just 37 balls to rescue his side and guide them into the final. The innings was regarded as one of the finest World Cup performances. He hit a massive six in that match which was described by David Lloyd as the shot of the tournament.  Inzamam made an equally vital contribution in the final of the World Cup, scoring 42 runs off just 35 balls, helping Pakistan reach a score of 249 after a sluggish start. These innings established Inzamam's billing as a big-game player, although he was unable to replicate his World Cup success in later tournaments.  Inzamam regard his best least highlighted innings of 90 not out against West Indies when Pakistan won their first ODI in the West Indies on 27 March 1993.  In total, Inzamam set a record for scoring the most half centuries in One Day Internationals, 83 - though this is now surpassed by Sachin Tendulkar, Jacques Kallis and Kumar Sangakkara. He also became the second batsman to score 10,000 runs in One-day Internationals (again after Tendulkar) and was named in the ICC World XI for both Tests and One-day Internationals in the 2005 ICC Awards. In his final ODI for Pakistan, playing against Zimbabwe in the 2007 Cricket World Cup, he took three catches whilst fielding, including the last one of the match, ending his One Day career.
Question: Did they win the series?
Answer: 

Problem: Background: Stephen Edelston Toulmin (; 25 March 1922 - 4 December 2009) was a British philosopher, author, and educator. Influenced by Ludwig Wittgenstein, Toulmin devoted his works to the analysis of moral reasoning. Throughout his writings, he sought to develop practical arguments which can be used effectively in evaluating the ethics behind moral issues.
Context: By reviving casuistry (also known as case ethics), Toulmin sought to find the middle ground between the extremes of absolutism and relativism. Casuistry was practiced widely during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance to resolve moral issues. Although casuistry largely fell silent during the modern period, in The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning (1988), Toulmin collaborated with Albert R. Jonsen to demonstrate the effectiveness of casuistry in practical argumentation during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, effectively reviving it as a permissible method of argument.  Casuistry employs absolutist principles, called "type cases" or "paradigm cases," without resorting to absolutism. It uses the standard principles (for example, sanctity of life) as referential markers in moral arguments. An individual case is then compared and contrasted with the type case. Given an individual case that is completely identical to the type case, moral judgments can be made immediately using the standard moral principles advocated in the type case. If the individual case differs from the type case, the differences will be critically assessed in order to arrive at a rational claim.  Through the procedure of casuistry, Toulmin and Jonsen identified three problematic situations in moral reasoning: first, the type case fits the individual case only ambiguously; second, two type cases apply to the same individual case in conflicting ways; third, an unprecedented individual case occurs, which cannot be compared or contrasted to any type case. Through the use of casuistry, Toulmin demonstrated and reinforced his previous emphasis on the significance of comparison to moral arguments, a significance not addressed in theories of absolutism or relativism.
Question: How did Toulmin relate this to moral issues?
Answer:
Through the procedure of casuistry, Toulmin and Jonsen identified three problematic situations in moral reasoning: