What Money Can T Buy The Moral Limits Of Markets Chapter Summary
In Michael Sandel’s novel “What money can’t buy: The moral limits of markets” he speaks on the role money has in our society. He tells us that the usage of money goes beyond purchasing and selling a good, but how it’s used to persuade and challenges a person's ethical values. What I found to be most important of Sandel’s book is his two objections for why society should resist to engage in the further development of the market, corruption and coercion. He opens the book by telling us all things money can buy. Some of the examples he uses are the idea of money being used in bookstores to buy a certain position on the shelf that is more direct to the customer’s line of sight. This phenomena for publishers buy in isn’t a new idea, many companies
…show more content…
Sandal gives an example of a person selling their organs to support their family, that a poor person really doesn’t choose to give up their organ for money, but they are morally obligated because they are bound to provide for their family. For this argument he focusses on the consent given by the individual and how their choices are impacted by their background. For this reason, the further expansion of the market should be resisted because people with different financial backgrounds aren’t getting an equal opportunity to benefit in the market. Also, that since individuals aren’t given a fair shot due to their financial background that this further widen gap between the rich the poor. The second objection to reason why we should resist the expanding market is due to corruption. Michael states that “points to the degrading effect of market valuation and exchange on certain goods and practices” (Line 16, pg.94). He means that certain moral values and goods diminish/weaken when we buy and sell things in a market. That by participating in the market we is can damage our outlook on life. He focuses more on the attitude of a individual towards the good in the market and how this relationship is damaging. His example to explain his idea was a further development of the poor man selling his organ what if instead of a kidney, we sold a human
Sandal gives an example of a person selling their organs to support their family, that a poor person really doesn’t choose to give up their organ for money, but they are morally obligated because they are bound to provide for their family. For this argument he focusses on the consent given by the individual and how their choices are impacted by their background. For this reason, the further expansion of the market should be resisted because people with different financial backgrounds aren’t getting an equal opportunity to benefit in the market. Also, that since individuals aren’t given a fair shot due to their financial background that this further widen gap between the rich the poor. The second objection to reason why we should resist the expanding market is due to corruption. Michael states that “points to the degrading effect of market valuation and exchange on certain goods and practices” (Line 16, pg.94). He means that certain moral values and goods diminish/weaken when we buy and sell things in a market. That by participating in the market we is can damage our outlook on life. He focuses more on the attitude of a individual towards the good in the market and how this relationship is damaging. His example to explain his idea was a further development of the poor man selling his organ what if instead of a kidney, we sold a human