Good News for the Modern Economist

NII-Electronic Library Service

[[he

idea

for

this

_paper

stems

from

the widespread sense

and

feeLing

that markets on which the world

have

become

so

dependent

on to

_get

the

_goods

and services

hasre

become

so

detached

from

fundamental

values and that we need to

recon-nect them.

Thus,

renowned

Hirvard

Professor

ofpolitical

phitosophy

Michael

SandeLi}

and

2009

Reith

Lecturer

says

tha: we need to rethink the role ofmarkets

in

achieving the

common

_good

and that there should

be

less

emphasis on self

interest

and more on rhe

_pursuit

of the common

_good.

IIhe

first

half

of the

_paper

is

basically

a recapitulation of

Prof

Sandel's

three

Reith

lectures.

It

aLso condenses other writ-ers'

interpretation

ofwhat

Adam

Srnirh

meant

by

moral

senti-ments and

individual

ethics.

the

second

halfis

asetof

Lessons

derived

from

stories

in

the

Bibie.2)

'Ihe

lessons

may

be

used

jn

class

by

the

teacher

to

show that the concept of the common

good

has

existed even then and that eyer since,

life

has

had

an economicdimension,

1.

MarketsandMorals

Qyite

a number of economists

have

been

trained

in

the

tradition where markets reign supreme.

The

recent events,

however,

harre

shown that markets can

fail

and that they can

fail

with a

loud

bang.

Likewise,

ever since

[fransparency

Inter-national _{came out} with

its

Corruption

Perceptions

Indel

in

i995,

corruption

has

been

cLted as one oF the critical

impedi-ments to achieving

high

and

inclusive

_growth.

However,

ifthis

is

the

case,

the

answer to achieving the

kind

ofgrowth we

de-sire,

lies

beyond

the confines ofthe economics

discipline.

Eco-nomies

(as

we

have

been

taught) as a

discipline

can only

in-form

us 2bout the

_possible

implicatiens

of

_po]icy

choices

but

does

not

te]1

us what

is

right or wrong or what's

just

and

un-just.

Moreover,

In

these

times of

financial

crisis and economic

hardship,

we need refbrms.

And

whatever natuFe these reforms

may take, one thing

is

certain: we need teforms that are

less

Zefournalof

EtonemicEUuczation

M,3a

Octoben

2011

1

Department

of

Econornics,

College

of

Economics

and

Management,

Universit)t

oF the

Philippines

Los

Bafios

oriented to the

_pursuit

of

individual

selfinterest and more to

the

_pursuit

ofthe common

_good.

Prof

Sandel

in

his

2009

inaugural

Reith

Lecture

entitled

"Markets

and

Morals]'

contests that we need to think afresh

about what we mean

by

'the common

_geod'

and whether we

need to

inculcate

deeper

moral values

in

our

_public

liyes.

He

goes

further

by

arguing that rethinking whRt

is

"the

common

good'

requires a more

demanding

meaning ofwhat

it

means to

be

a citizen

(and

not

just

as a consumer).

In

this regard, the role of markets and specificalLy3 the

moral

limits

ofmarkets come to the

fore.

ProE

Sandel

says that

markets

have

always run on selflinterest and thus

from

the

standpoint of economies, selfinterest and

_greed

arethe same.

Ihe

role of markets

is

to turn thisvice

into

an

instrument

of the

_public

_good.

However,

an

alternative

approach would

be

to rethink the reach ofmarkcts; or

in

other words, to think

through themoral

limits

ofmarkets.

Table

1.

Markets

in

which

transactions

were

once

repugnant

l

Human

remainsOrgan

donation-

kidney,

liver

Pollutionmarkets/Tradeableemissions

entitlements

i

iReproductionandsexSurrogatemothers,egg

spermdonation

Finance

/

Source:

Roth,

A.

2007

."Repugnance

as a

Constraint

on

Mar-kets:'

The.Journat

_of

Economic

Perspectives,

Vo],

21,

No.

3

Summer.

'Ihble

1

shows some exampEes ofmarkets

in

which trans-actions were once

frowned

upon.

However,

through time, [he world

has

come to recognize these

_goods,

For

instance,

corn-metcial systems

for

acquiring and

distributing

blood

are now

widespread although the

_practice

started as a voluntary

trans-action.

The

_practice

of surrogate mothers

is

well-known

in

76

V>ptV'VA

taemeg#ee

li

iss

ee

ttt ttt

lsu e"di# abl--e {ajptg{

¢

-ig4see#tth -estete,etb

teet"-,#te

tig abt#St#t# thtpt/gl:ffrr'gllilil

MAMza

±

ftrcE

ftgxfi

NII-Electronic Library Service

some ceuntries as well as the markets

for

tradeable

_pollution

permtts.

We

have

created markets

for

almost all

kinds

of

com-modities

like

blood,

human

organs,

_greenhouse

_gases,

etc,

Prof

Sandel

argues that

it

is

this

expansion of markets and of

market values

into

spheres of

Life

traditionally

_governed

by

non-market norms whjch

has

contributed to the

_problem.

VVk]

need to see that the market

is

not a mere allocation

mecha-nism and that they embody norrns and values.

As

S.

Bowles

(1998)

also

states, markets and other economic

institutions

do

more than

allocate

_goods

and services: they also

influence

the

evolution of yalues, tastes, and

_{personalities.}

Hence,

Sandel

argues that there

isa

need to reinject

into

the economic

disd-pline

some moral

inquirM

In

1941,

the

Association

for

Social

Economics

was

formed

to advance economic research

into

the areas of ethics 2nd

_phiLosophy

Kenneth

Boulding's

]

968

_presidential

speech was entitled "Economics as a

Moral

Science."

Nobel

Iaureates

Friedrich

von

Hayek

and

Amartya

Sen

also

wrote Rbout value

judgments

and

_positivist

analysis, with the

latter

even arguing that the

_perceived

dichotomy

between

_positive

and normative

anatysis

is

false

because

value

judgments

_permeate

_positivist

analysis.

Hausrnan

and

McPherson

(I993)

argued about the

rele-vance ofmoral thinking

in

both

_positive

and normative

eco-nomics.

Moral

_principies,

they claim, not only

have

bearing

on

issues

related to

_poLicy

they aLso

influence

the

_questions

economists ask and the answers they

_propose,

i)eThy should

economists care about rnoral

_questions?

Hausman

and

McPherson

(1993)

state

fbur

reasons:

(1)

the morality oF

eco-nomic agents

inAuences

their

behavior

and economic

out-comes,

(2)

welfare economics rests on strong moral

presuppo-sitions,

(3)

the conclusions ofeconomics must

be

iinked

[o

[he

moral commirrnenrs that

drive

_public

_polics

and

(4)

_positive

and normative economics are

frequentEy

intermingled,

Morality

influences

economic outcomes.

The

moral

prin-ciples accepted

by

economists matter

because

they are eco-nornic agents as well as theorists and their

theorizing

refiects

their moral commitments and

influences

the actions and

meral commitments of others

(Hausman

and

McPherson

(1993).

While

Adam

Smith

is

credited with the argument that

self-Eove

is

the

ft]rce

that

drives

the market system,

i,e.,

selfL

iove

is

a necessary condition

for

the unleashing of

human-kind"s

_ptoductive

energy and creativit}c

he

atso argued that

it

is

not suffcient

(Evensk"20e5).

Evensky

(2005)

says that

Smith

recognized that an unrestrained

fteedom

to

_pursue

selfiinter-est could undermine a constructiye

liberal

society and so we ask,

how

docs

a

liberal

society ayoid

degenerating

into

a

''rent-seeking

society''?

lhe

answer, according to

Smith,

is

se-curity and [hat

the

source of this security must

be

asystem of

justice

that establishes and enforces

_principles

oFinterpersonal

behavior

that

insure

the

individuals'

security

But

ultimatelM

the cohesiveness and constructiveness ofa

liberal

ordet

de-pends,

according to

Smith,

not on

institutional

_government

bur

on selflgovernment or on the ethicaL maturity of the

citi-zenry

A

liberal

society can only

be

constructive and

sustain-able to

the

degree

that the

hearts

of

its

citizens ernbody a

properly

measured sentiment oFjustice and rcgulate

them-selves

by

that measure.

Thus,

the sine

_eua

non of a

liberal

soci-ety

is

moral sentiments

(EvenskM

2005)

Evensky

(2005)

further

states that

Smich's

ideaL

liber2L

society would

be

inhabited

by

such

perfectly

virtuous

beings.

It

would

be

a sodety

in

which atl could enjoy

Iiberty

secured

by

the rule ofjustice.

It

would

be

a society

in

which there would

be

no nced

for

institutional

_goyernment

to

_police

the rules ofjustice,

for

in

this

_perfect

wortd cirizens would

know

the

ideal

measure oFjustjce and would

have

the

selfLgovern-ment, the selficommand, to enforce

it

upon themselves.

Smith

according to

Evensky

(2005)

believed

that civic

ethics could mature with

time

and experience.

Becoming

ma-ture

in

this case means an ever-doser approximation of

the

ethical

ideat

consistent with a

Iiberal

order.

Observing

the

be-havior

of othcrs would

lead

us to

form

our own rules con-cerning what

is

fit

and

_proper

either to

be

done

or to

be

avoided.

But

education and experience would a[so make the

rules accessible to us.

Social

concurrence with their cQntent

and sociaYlegal sanctions

for

their

violation

_give

these

rules

authority over us.

We

arenor capable ofperfection,

but

we are

capab]e ofthe citizenship necessary

for

social cohesion, owing

te the capacity ofour society to

impress

upon us

_general

rules that can

_guide

our

behavior.

For

a

_good

number oF

_years,

the

_goyerning

economic

philosophy

oFthe

United

States

and

Britain

was

defined

by

the

faith

that markcts are the

_primary

instrument

for

achieving the

public

good,

The

book

and the

film

"The

_Commanding

Heights

-

'Ihe

Battle

for

the

Wbrtd

Economy"

clearly

depicted

this.

It

showcd the

battle

of

ideas

between

John

Maynard

Keynes

and

Freidrich

von

Hayek

and

heralded

the

_political

re-gimes

of

Ronald

Reagan

and

Margaret

1[hatcher.

However,

the

NII-Electronic Library Service

many episodes of

financial

crises afterwards

have

_questioned

this

faith.

Market

failure

is

being

_given

as one reason why

gov-ernment should

interyene.

'Ihat

is,

_government

should tryto

reproduce the outcomes that cempetitive markets would

pro-duce

ifal1

_goods

and resources were

properly

priced.

Profi

Sandel

stresses that nowhere

is

this made more

ex-plicit

than

in

environmental

_policv

Because

some resources

like

air and water are

free,

then companies and consumers will

produce

too much of the

bad

_goods.

The

duty

ofgovernment

then

is

to setregulations to correct

for

this market

failure.

Tb

do

this,

_policymakers

have

to ask

how

much

_pollution

is

desir-able.

Bur

to answer this

_question,

ProE

Sandel

says

that

poli-cymakers

have

to

figure

out what value ro

_pLace

on clean air, cEean water, and the othcr resutting

benefits.

In

order to rnake these calcutations, regulators often use

`fcost-benefit

analysis": they

_place

a monetary value on the

benefits

of clean airand water, compare them with the costs, and setregulations ac-cordingly

lhis

is

what

Prof

Sandel

calls "market-mimicking

gevernance."

Because

there

is

no market to setthe

_price

(and

thus allocate the

bad

_goods),

a

_pseudo

_price

is

derived.

What

is

wrong wirh comparing [he costs and

benefits

of

government

regulation?

Nothing

if

it

simply means assessing the advantages and

disadvantages

ofa

_given

_polic}L

But

in

as-signing a monetary value to costs and

benefits,

ProE

Sandel

argues,

it

triesto mimic the market.

However,

many of the

benefits

ofpublic

_policy

involve

yalues that cannot

be

cap-tured

in

monetary terms,

like

the yalue ofhuman

Life.

Another

shortcoming, according to

Profi

Sandel,

is

that monetizing atl

costs and

benefits

makes

for

a spurious science that shifts

deci-sion-making

from

democratic

_politics

to technocrats.

In

yaluing things, we need to

know

the

_purpose

of the

geod.

But

when we

detach

arguments about

justice

and rights

ffom

arguments about

the

_good

life,

according

to

Prof

Sandel,

we are committing a mistake.

VeJhy?

Because,

it

is

not

always

possible

te

decide

_questions

ofjustice and rights without

re-solying substantiye moral

_questions.

This

is

true

whether we

are arguing abollt surrogacy or about

how

to

distribute

flutes

or

the

right to use a

_golfcart

or same sex marriage.

Arguments

about

justice

and rights areunavoidably arguments about the

moral meaning of

the

_goods

at stake.

As

consumers, market-mimicking

_governance

since

it

provides

a

_price,

can satisfy us.

But

it

can

do

nothing to rnake us

democratic

citizens.

Prof

Sandel

asks:i)7hy then

have

we

drifted

away

from

older

traditions

ofsolidarity and civicvirtue

and toward more market-oriented ways of conceivjng

_pubiic

life?

Profi

Sandet

himselfprovides

the answer:

market-mim-icking

_governance,

by

seeming to

be

non-judgmental

is

ap-pealing,

because

it

seems to offer a way of making

_politicaL

choices witheut rnalcing

hard

and centroyersial moral choices,

So,

for

example, rather

than

engage

in

amorally charged

de-bate

about the

_proper

way of valuing

the

environment, or

about the attitudes toward nature we should try to cultivate

-rather than

do

this, wc try to set environmental

_policy

by

working

from

_people's

market

_preferences.

So

we ask

_people

how

much they weuld

_pay

to save the

Haribon

(the

Philippine

monkey-eating eagle); or we try to

determine

the rnonetary

value

_peopLe

implicitl}r

_place

on

rheir

lives

when

the)r

accept

risky

jobs.

[[hen

by

cost-benefit analysis, we come up wtth the

yaEue of

human

Iives

and the

Haribon.

A

politics

of the common

_good,

unlike market-driven

poLitics,

implies

that we think ofourselves more as citizens and

iess

as consumers.

Market-mimicking

_governance

takes

peo-ple's

_preferences

as

_given

and

fixed.

But

when we

debate

as

citizens, when we engage

in

democratic

argument, then the

whole

_point

eF the activity requires us to critically reflect on

our

preferences,

to

_question

them, to chalLenge them, to

en-large

them, and to

improve

them(Sandel,2009).

Thus,

if

we are are able to change

_patterns

ofenergy use and

bring

about a meaningfu1 reductien

in

_greenhouse

_gas

emissions,

it

will not

be

because

emissions trading schemes

al-towed

some countries to

buy

and sell the tight to

_pollute.

iJeThiie _{market mechanisms can}

be

_usefu1

_instruments,

_real charige will

depend

on changing

_people's

attitudes toward

na-ture, and rethinking our responsibilities toward the

_planet

we

share.

This

is

a rnoral and spiritual

_project,

not onty an

eco-nomic one

(Sandel,

2009).

11.

Lessons

from

the

Bible

For

astart,we can

Iook

to the

Bible

to

derive

sample

les-sons

that

hopefu11y

will make us

_pursue

more

the

common

good

and

become

better

citizens.

The

BibLe

is

replete with sto-ries which

have

an economic

dimension.

Likewise,

by

using

parables

from

the

BibLe,

we can show that even

in

the early

times, the

discipline

has

had

an

impact

on the

lives

of the

people.

For

instance,

in

Genesis

41,

verses

47-57,

in

the story ofJoseph, the rudiments ofsupply and

demand

are

brought

to the

fofe.

Because

of a

famine,

there was

limited

supply ef

grain,

However,

because

Joseph

had

ordcrcd

the

_people

to

store

_grain

in

the

_previous

seven

years

of

_good

harvests,

there

78

ti>ntV'VA

;;-be･;･lg･-giitta

sulpebtt#bmbsu.te-eee/te,suel-tenyede/v"th

::g:1:sc;･::i::;:::::.ve,di

nvtrM,bent

IftreMza

±

ftsc

ftasw

NII-Electronic

EE

NII-Electronic Library Service

was enough

buffer

supply to ayoid shortages and to stablllze

prices.

In

Matthew

17,

verses

24-27,

the

issue

ofpaying tax was

discussed.

In

Matthew

20

verses

1-16

and

Matthew

25

verses

14-30,

the workers

in

the vineyard and the story ofthe

three servants

_given

talents can

be

used te

Mustrate

the

con-cept ofa contract and the notion of

investment.

The

issue

efgood citizenship may

be

likened

to the story oF the

Good

Samaritan

_(Luke

1O

verses

30-37).

When

we ask ourselves,

have

been

_good

citizens,

it

is

just

like

asking

our-selves

have

we

been

a

_good

sistertbrotherlneighbor?

Professor

Cielito

E

Habito

and

fbrmer

Economic

Planning

Minister

oF the

Philippines

has

written about a "solidarity economy" where aLE members work together towarcl ashared

_goal

of

up-lifting

the

lives

ofall.

While

human

beings

have

an

intrinsic

driye

to

_pursue

selfiinterest, we

also

_pessess

an

instinct

for

al-truism,

This

leads

us to value the common

good

more and

makes us

behave

in

ways that may not always

_prornote

only

our own selfiinterest.

What

fbllows

are three samp]e

iessons,

all

derived

from

the

BibLe.

1[he

lessons

are meant

for

General

Education

classes

in

Economics.

LESSON

1.

THE

GOOD

SAMARI'IAN

(AKA

THE

GOOD

CITIZEN)

KEY

ECONOMIC

CONCEPTS

attruism aid citizen consumer

LESSONOBJECTIVES

1.

Refiect

on what

it

means to

be

a

_good

citizen.

2.

Do

a

deed

whtch exemplifies that ofa

_good

izen.

LESSON:

Luke

10:30-37

The

lawyer

wanted to trick

Jesus.

He

asked, "Who

_is

my neighbor?"

Jesus

answered with astory: "A man traveled

from

Jerusa-lem

to

Jericho.

He

was robbed and

beaten

by

bandits.

As

he

lay

on the road, a

_priest

walked figiit

by

So

did

a

Levite.

But

a

Samaritan

had

_pjty.

He

washed and

bandaged

the traveler's wounds and carried

him

te a nearby

inn.

rlhis

Samaritan

paid

the

innkeeper

tocare

for

the manJ'

"Which of these three were the wounded man's

neigh-bor?"

`tThe man who

had

pity/"

"Right,"

said

Jesus.

"Go

and

do

the same."

Tb

theJews oFJesus' time, there was no such thing as a

"good

Samaritan,"

_Jews

and

Samaritans

hated

each other

for

religious and

political

reasons.

The

fact

that

it

was a

Sarnaritan

who

helped

the

Jews

shows that we are

al1

neighbors.

ACTIVITIES

1.

Charity

begins

at

home.

Do

a

_good

deed

wards a neighbor,

2.

Considervolunteeringwithahospiceprogram.

Or

help

in

tutoring eLementary school children

in

your

communlty.

QUESTIONS

1,

Can

you

think

ofinstances when

in

order

to

be

a

"neighbor,"

it

might

be

necessary to

be

more

cerncd with mercy than with the

law?

(At

Home

with the iJebrd,

1995)

2.

Is

the

idea

of

'neighbor"

(one

who closes the

distance)

anew one

to

_you?

Describe

some

incident

in

which sorneone took the

initiative

and came re

you

as a neighbor,

How

did

it

afllect

_your

life?

{At

Home

with the

Wbrd,

1995)

3.

What

arethe Tights and responsibilities ofa(1)

consumer

(2)

citizen?

How

are they alike?

How

are

theydifferent?

LESSON

2.

JOSEPH

AND

THE

ECONOMIC

SCISSORS

KEY

ECONOMIC

CONCEPTS

supply

_price

buffersupply

demand

famine

shortagelsurplus

LESSON

OBJECTIVES

1.

Illustrate

the rudiments ofsupply and

demand

so that students can see their

importance.

2,

Show

the

different

measures used to address

sues of shortages and surpluses,

LESSON

,

GENESIS

41i47-57

Joseph

was thirty

_years

otd when

he

began

te serve

Pha-raoh.

In

the

_years

when the crops were

_good,

Joseph

saved

food.

Ihere

was so much

food

saved,

it

couldn't

be

counted.

Then

the

_good

_years

in

Egypt

ended.

The

seven

_years

with no

food

began

and the

Egyptians

were

hungry.

They

went to

Pharaoh

fbr

food.

He

said, "Go to

Joseph

and

do

what

he

says.]'

Joseph

opened

al1

the storehouses and sold

food

to the

Egvptians.

In

fact,

the whole world came to

Joseph

fbr

food.

In

Canaan,

Jacob

heard

ofthe

fbod

in

Egypt.

He

told

his

!

791

NII-Electronic Library Service

sons, "Go

down

and

buy

food

for

us.

[Ihen

we won't starve."

So

al1

the

brothers

but

Benjarnin

went

down

to

Eg}rpt

ACTIVITIES

1.

Clip

from

newspapers or magazines artictes

which

illustrate

the

demand

or supply condition

in

anycommodity.

2.

Research

on the

different

methods

by

which

countries andtor multilateral organizations

have

dressed

the

foed

shortagelsurplus

_problem.

QUESTIONS

1.

If

virtue was a commodityl what would

be

its

Price?

2.

Reflect

and comment en the

fo11owing

ment

by

William

Letwin

(1963)

in

the

Origins

of

Scientific

Economics

-

"Every

econemic act,

being

the action ofa

human

being,

is

necessarily also a

moral act,"

3.

Some

people

have

proposed

alleviating critical

shortages of

(a)

uncontaminated

blood

ft)r

sions,

(b)

kidneys,

livers

and

lungs

for

transplants;

and

(c

)

surrogate mothers to carry

fertilized

human

ova

by

_permitting

a

free

market

in

blood

and

man organs, and encouraging surrogate

hood.

What

do

you

think ofthe

_proposal?

LESSON

3,

THE

MARKET

ALLOCATION

MECHANISM

AND

SHARING

KEY

ECONOMIC

CONCEPTS

allocation

marketmechanism

fairness

Pareto

principle

LESSONOBJECTIVES

1.

Tb

find

out

how

different

societies allocate

goods

and services

2.

'lb

learn

about weifare

LESSON,

JOHN

6:

5-

13

Jesus

welcomed the crowds and spoke te them ofthe

do-minion of

God,

and cured those who

had

need of

heaLing.

Now

the

day

began

to wear awayi and the twelve came and said to

Jesus,

"Send

the crowd awaM to

_go

to the villages and

country about, to

lodge

and

_get

_provisions;

for

we are

here

in

a

lonely

_place."

But

Jesus

said to

them,

"Ybu

give

thern

some-thing to eat."

Tliey

said, "iJae

have

no more than

five

loaves

and

two

fish

-

unless we are to

_go

and

buy

food

for

all

these

people."

For

there

were about

five

thousand

mcn.

And

Jesus

said to

his

disciples,

"Make

them sit

down

in

companies,

s

about

fifty

each."

And

they

did

so, and made

them

allsit

down.

And

taking the

five

loaves

and two

fish

Jesus

looked

up to

heaven,

and

blessed

and

broke

them, and

_gaye

them [o the

disciples

toset

before

the crowd.

And

all ate and were satisfied.

And

they

took

up what was

left

over, twelye

baskets

ofbroken

'P

leces,

Jesus

seems to

be

making the

_point

that the

disciples

are

to share whatever they

have.

In

sharing, there wiLL

be

rnore

than enough

fbr

everyone.

Logic

and

human

nature saM "iJVle

have

no more than

five

loaves

and two

fish."

But

_Jesus

asks

that these meager

_provisions

be

stretched to their

limits.

'Ihe

realityofbeing one

_peop]e,

inheritors

ofthe

_promises

made to

the tribes ofIsrael,

is

a reality capable of transforming not only

the spiritual realm

but

socia] and economic

life

as well.

ACTIVITY

1.

Recal1

from

your

own

life

those times of

ing

that

made a

difihrence

to

_you

or to others.

2.

Find

out

if

thete are

fbod

_programs,

i.e,

soup

kitchen,

local

fbod

pantrM

etc.

in

_you

cemmunitM

i"ahat _can

_you

_do

_to

_help?

QUESTIONS

1.

Ybu

are stranded on a

island

with

fbur

of

_your

friends.

One

daM

you

find

a

bar

ofdark chocolate.

What

do

you

do

with

it?

2.

Debate

on

the

fo11owing

issue

raised

by

Profi

Michael

Sandel:

Suppose

there are some very

good,

public

basketball

ceurts

in

_your

town.

Who

should

_get

_priority

to use the courts?

Should

ty

be

given

te the

_players

who are willing to

_pay

the

most?

Should

court-time

be

assigned on a

come,

first-served

basis?

Shou]d

_priority

be

_given

to

the worst

_players,

who most need

the

_practice?

Shoutd

it

be

giyen

to the

best

_players,

who will

play

the

best

basketball

?

SXJhich of these arrangements

would

be

falr

or

just?

What

is

the

_purpose

ketball,

and

does

it

help

_you

to answer this

tion?

gegee$1)/#tv-t-.surtee

/"tezat"tut ua#

A

sample

lessoll

ftom

ProE

Sandel's

class

_goes

like

rhis:

Suppose

therc

are some very

_good,

_public

tcnnis courts in

_yout

town.

Who

should

_get

_priority

te use thecourts?

Should

_priority

be

_given

to thetcnnis

players

who arewillingto

pay

the most?

Should

court-time

be

assigned on a

first-come,

first-served

basis?

Should

_priority

be

_given

te

the

werst tennis

playcrs,

who most need the

practice?

Should

it

bc

given

to the

best

tennis

_ptayers,

who will

_play

thc

best

Ii801

Y>ptV'VA

::;;lil:;;:

:

_t.tt.tttt.t

:;

gy.

tg

g;

#4n-/el#--eeeigte/vnsdi

entvete,w-#S

#tesuv#.---,fitedeee,edese

t-tmza#w/susub

,g;,lithsttste,ee,#e

rczzmng

)(ftrets

ftaslffS

NII-Electronic Library Service

2)

tennisi iJVhichoFthesearrangements vveuld

be

fair

or

just?

iJVhat

is

the

_purposc

oftcnnis, and

does

it

help

_you

te answer this

_qucstion.

Anorher

sample

_qucstion

is::

Say

we

liave

some nice

flutes.

i)Vho sHould

_gct

them}

According

to

Aristotle,

it's not the rich

_pcrson,

since

playing

flutes

has

nothing to

do

with moncy. Not isitthe

person

who witl

bc

made most

happy,

since making

_good

music is

difflercnt

than

being

happy.

'lhc

_pLLrpose

is DFa

fiute

isto be _played, and to

be

pia.vcd

-'ell. So,Aristotlethinks,thc

flutes

should

_go

to the

bcst

fiu[e

_players,

Do

_you

agrec?

Hew

clsc shoutd we assign the

flutes?Although

the

Bible

was thc main source of the

lessens,

itis by no

means theonly rcference that may

be

uscd,

Rcfeien

¢cs[1]

[2]

[s]

Bohen,

OSU

M,, et. al. c.

1994.

At

Hbme

with

the

IVbrd

19Y5.

Ar[hdioceseofChicago,Liturg},"ainingPublications.

Bowles,

S.

1998.

"Endogenous

Prcferences:

_Tlie

_Cultural

Conse-qucnces

ofMarkets and Other Economic

Institutions,"

Yburnat

of

fl'onemicLitentt"re;Xlo1.

S6,

No.

1

March.

Evensk)',

_J,

2005,

'Adam

Smith's

"thcery

of MoraT

_Sentiments"/

On

Morals

and

Wliy

'lhcy

Matter

to a

Libetal

Society

of

Free

Peo-[4][5]

[6]

[7]

[81

[91

[10]

[11]

ple

and

Free

Markets,"

T)befournat

of'Elrenomic

llerspectives,

llo1.

19,No.3Summer.

Habito,

C.

2009,

iJVitn[ed:

_A

'bayanihan

_ccenomM'

_{BusinessVObrld.}

Hausman,

D,and

M,

McPhcrsoll.

1993.

"lking

_Ethics

_Serious]y:

Economics

and

Contemporary

MoraT

Philosophy"

fournai

ofEto-nomicLiternture,Nbl3l,No2June,

Larkin, A. Beyond Economism:

Defining

Ecenomics

to

Reflect

Sociat

and

Environmental

Valucs.

Htip,'neondor,stclouttstate.

edidplarkin/ti4fine.hnnlRetrievedSeptembcr5,2002.

Padilla,

F.

Enhancing

Society's

Bioethic

Sensitiviry,

hmp.'Zhowza,.

_apd

edu.ph!-apcboploctnavdec081LirticleYbioethic.htmtRetrievedJLIy

21,2010.Roth,

A.

2007.

"Repugnance

as a

Constraint

on

Markets;'

71ee

.fou"tzalofEtvnoneic

Jlrmpectives,

Nbl.

21

,

No,

3

Summer.

Silk,

L1977.

"Ethics

inEconemics."

_Me

American

Etonomic

Re-view, Nk,t

67,

Ne

1,

Papers

Rnd

Procccdings

ofthe

Ametican

F.co-nomic

Association,

S16-320.

Wright,

_J.

B.

2003.

naching

the

E)hicat

fu"n`L:tions

_ofEtenomies.

'lhc

_Chronicle

_Review.

_Section

_2,

_August

_15,

_2003.

Transcript

of

Professor

Michael

Sandcl's

2009

Reith

1.ectures:

A

New

CitTzenship,

I.ecrure

1:

Markets

and

Morals,

June

9,

2009.

Lecture

2/ Moratity

in

Politics,

_June

1G,

2009,

Lccture

3:

Gefictics

and

Morals,

June

23,

2009.