ABSTRACT
In law, decisions have to be made in circumstances where there are insufficient grounds for doing this. How can this be done responsibly? Can an account be given of a form of reason that helps decision-makers cope in unprecedented situations? Can it be said convincingly of a decision that it was appropriate, even if it might have been otherwise? It is in this context that there has been a revival of interest in Aristotle's concept of phronesis.1
And if phronesis is understood as the ability to discern what is the proper thing to do in concrete situations, it is not hard to see why.
