Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper examines the significance to professional decision‐making of the concept of the ‘merits’. The merits serve in practical affairs to delineate considerations appropriate to ethical decision‐making and require in particular the avoidance of ‘self‐interest’. Drawing on the example of politics, it is argued that the boundaries of the ‘merits’are never fixed across professional fields but rather are determined by the distinctive character of the professional's fiduciary responsibilities; and that properly understood, the merits may demand some ‘self‐interested’considerations which in the common conception would be rejected. The political example also suggests how the ‘ethical’conflict over the accepted boundaries of the merits can mask fundamental normative and political differences which would be better made explicit.