Add your thoughts here… (optional)
from David Ruccio
Both Michael Sandel and Deirdre McCloskey treat market morality as a very trivial thing, and easily understood.
For Sandel, market morality is based on the idea that “some of the good things in life are degraded if turned into commodities.” Therefore, “the market” should be circumscribed and delimited according to community norms and values. McCloskey’s view, per contra, is that “the market” is responsible for tremendous economic growth, and especially for the decline in world poverty. Her version of market morality is to encourage the flourishing of markets, anywhere and everywhere.
The problem is, both market moralists—Sandel and McCloskey—treat markets in an abstract fashion, as “the market.” Neither wants to discuss different kinds of markets: slave markets, capitalist markets, communist markets, and so on. And therefore neither wants to recognize the fact that the different consequences of markets depend, at least in part, on how…
View original post さらに249語