Harvard philosophy professor Michael Sandel has some very particular views on the role of philosophy versus economics in markets. Not surprisingly, I, as an economist, see things quite differently. What do you think?
Explore Economics
Must Reads
- Using Economics at About.com
- What Is Economics?
- Microeconomics vs. Macroeconomics
- Economics as the "Dismal Science?"
- The Circular-Flow Model of the Economy
Most Popular
By Category
- Economics Basics
- Supply and Demand
- Measuring Economic Value
- Utility Maximization
- Production
- Types of Markets
- International Trade
- Regulation
- Externalities and Public Goods
- Output, Income, Money
- Income Distribution
- Business Cycles and Economic Growth
- Macroeconomic Stabilization Policy
- Notable Economists
- Fields of Economics
Comments
The professor does raise some good points. Markets tend to be efficient in the allocation of resources, yes, but we should ask the separate question of whether and when sometimes the most efficient allocation might indeed be immoral. Organs for sale is just one example. The level to which we can morally consent to things is not unlimited; I cannot sell myself into slavery, even if for a fixed duration, even if I wanted to. “Freedom of contract” is not the only human right. Efficiency, while important, is not the sole goal of a just system.
Just curious, but how do economists see the questions raised?
Be careful what you ask for.
You can see a pretty exact answer to your question here:
http://www.economistsdoitwithmodels.com/2012/11/24/my-imagined-yet-realistic-debate-between-michael-sandel-and-the-economics-world/
Hey all! I also think in the very same manner. Do you recognize THE LAW OF DIMINISHING MARGINAL UTILITY? This concept is applicable in both of the fields.:-))…