HarÂvard proÂfesÂsor Michael J. Sandel is one of our most famous livÂing philosoÂphers. His course, JusÂtice: What’s the Right Thing to Do? (availÂable via YouTube, iTunes, or HarÂvard’s web page) has been enjoyed by more than 14,000 stuÂdents over 30 years, and was recentÂly offered as a MasÂsive Open Online Course.
In July, the ParÂtialÂly ExamÂined Life phiÂlosÂoÂphy podÂcast disÂcussed Sandel’s first (and most acaÂdÂeÂmÂiÂcalÂly influÂenÂtial) book, 1982’s LibÂerÂalÂism and the LimÂits of JusÂtice, in which he argued that sociÂety can’t be neuÂtral with regard to claims about what the good life amounts to. ModÂern libÂerÂalÂism (by which he means the traÂdiÂtion comÂing from John Locke focusÂing on rights; this includes both AmerÂiÂca’s curÂrent libÂerÂals and conÂserÂvÂaÂtives) acknowlÂedges that peoÂple want difÂferÂent things and tries to keep govÂernÂment in a mereÂly mediÂatÂing role, givÂing peoÂple as much freeÂdom as posÂsiÂble.
So what’s the alterÂnaÂtive? Sandel thinks that pubÂlic disÂcourse shouldÂn’t just be about peoÂple pushÂing for what they want, but a diaÂlogue about what is realÂly good for us. He gives the famous examÂple of the Nazis marchÂing in SkokÂie. A libÂerÂal would defend free speech, even if the speech is repelÂlent. Sandel thinks that we can acknowlÂedge that some speech is actuÂalÂly perÂniÂcious, that the interÂests of that comÂmuÂniÂty’s HoloÂcaust surÂvivors are simÂply more imporÂtant than the interÂests of those who want to spread a mesÂsage of hate.
You can lisÂten to the disÂcusÂsion of Sandel’s views below or at the ParÂtialÂly ExamÂined Life webÂsite:
A week latÂer, a folÂlow-up episode brought Sandel himÂself onto the podÂcast, priÂmarÂiÂly to speak about his most recent book, What MonÂey Can’t Buy: The Moral LimÂits of MarÂkets. A more popÂuÂlar work, this book conÂsidÂers numerÂous examÂples of the marÂket sociÂety gone amok, where everyÂthing from sex to body parts to adverÂtisÂing space on the side of one’s house is potenÂtialÂly for sale.
Sandel helped us underÂstand the conÂnecÂtion between this and his earÂliÂer work: In remainÂing neuÂtral among comÂpetÂing conÂcepÂtions of what’s realÂly good for us, libÂerÂalÂism has made an all-too-quick peace with unfetÂtered exchange. If two peoÂple want to make a deal, who are the rest of us to step in and stop it? LibÂerÂal thinkÂing does jusÂtiÂfy preÂventÂing supÂposÂedÂly free exchanges on the grounds that they might not actuÂalÂly be free, e.g. one side is under undue ecoÂnomÂic presÂsure, not mature or fulÂly informed, in some way coerced or incomÂpeÂtent. But Sandel wants to argue that some pracÂtices can be mereÂly degradÂing, even if perÂformed willÂingÂly, and that a moralÂly neuÂtral sociÂety doesÂn’t have the conÂcepÂtuÂal appaÂraÂtus to forÂmuÂlate such a claim. Instead, as exemÂpliÂfied by his course on jusÂtice, Sandel thinks that moral issues need to be a part of pubÂlic debate. By extenÂsion, we can’t preÂtend that ecoÂnomÂics is a moralÂly neuÂtral sciÂence that mereÂly meaÂsures human behavÂior. Our emphaÂsis on ecoÂnomÂics in pubÂlic polÂiÂcy crowds out othÂer posÂiÂtive goods like citÂiÂzenÂship and integriÂty.
For addiÂtionÂal backÂground, lisÂten to the ParÂtialÂly ExamÂined Life’s earÂliÂer disÂcusÂsion of John Rawls, the father of modÂern libÂerÂalÂism who is Sandel’s main tarÂget in his disÂcusÂsion of libÂerÂalÂism. You could also watch Sandel’s lecÂture on Rawls from his JusÂtice course.
Mark LinÂsenÂmayÂer runs the ParÂtialÂly ExamÂined Life phiÂlosÂoÂphy podÂcast and blog, which has just hit episode 100 with a speÂcial live-in-front-of-an-audiÂence disÂcusÂsion of PlaÂto’s SymÂpoÂsium, now availÂable on audio or video. You can access the ParÂtialÂly ExamÂined Life podÂcast via iTunes or the PEL web site.
RelatÂed ConÂtent:
What’s the Right Thing to Do?: PopÂuÂlar HarÂvard Course Now Online
Free Online PhiÂlosÂoÂphy CoursÂes
