Freedom, Markets and Moral Motivation: Towards a More Adequate Account of the Implicit Morality of the Market

IF 0.5 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
C. Bernacchio
{"title":"Freedom, Markets and Moral Motivation: Towards a More Adequate Account of the Implicit Morality of the Market","authors":"C. Bernacchio","doi":"10.1177/09716858231220688","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The market failures approach is amongst the most influential theories of business ethics. Its interest within the field is, in large part, a result of its rejection of moralism and any sort of applied ethics approach, favouring, in contrast, a focus on the institutionally embodied goal of economic activity, which it takes to be that of Pareto efficiency. From this articulation of the goal, or purpose, of markets, a set of efficiency imperatives are derived that are taken to comprise the implicit morality of the market. However, the market failures approach has not adequately explained the basis of market actors’ moral motivation, that is, the reasons individuals have to self-consciously adhere to moral norms governing market transactions. This failure, I argue, stems from its misspecification of the purpose of the market. After explaining this failure to address the problem of moral motivation, I argue that a distinctive mode of freedom understood as a form of self-authorship is better seen as the purpose of the market, a goal that actually animates individual market participants. I then argue that this notion of freedom is intrinsically linked to a conception of responsibility and that this notion of responsibility can be more adequately conceptualized as involving a set of market virtues focused on promoting mutually beneficial transactions. Thus, the link between freedom and responsibility, stemming from an individual’s need to legitimize their freedom in a market context, provides the basis for a self-conscious sense of moral motivation. As such, this approach better captures the implicit morality of the market while also addressing the problem of moral motivation.","PeriodicalId":44074,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Values","volume":"45 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Human Values","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09716858231220688","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The market failures approach is amongst the most influential theories of business ethics. Its interest within the field is, in large part, a result of its rejection of moralism and any sort of applied ethics approach, favouring, in contrast, a focus on the institutionally embodied goal of economic activity, which it takes to be that of Pareto efficiency. From this articulation of the goal, or purpose, of markets, a set of efficiency imperatives are derived that are taken to comprise the implicit morality of the market. However, the market failures approach has not adequately explained the basis of market actors’ moral motivation, that is, the reasons individuals have to self-consciously adhere to moral norms governing market transactions. This failure, I argue, stems from its misspecification of the purpose of the market. After explaining this failure to address the problem of moral motivation, I argue that a distinctive mode of freedom understood as a form of self-authorship is better seen as the purpose of the market, a goal that actually animates individual market participants. I then argue that this notion of freedom is intrinsically linked to a conception of responsibility and that this notion of responsibility can be more adequately conceptualized as involving a set of market virtues focused on promoting mutually beneficial transactions. Thus, the link between freedom and responsibility, stemming from an individual’s need to legitimize their freedom in a market context, provides the basis for a self-conscious sense of moral motivation. As such, this approach better captures the implicit morality of the market while also addressing the problem of moral motivation.
自由、市场与道德动机:自由、市场和道德动机:对市场隐含道德性的更充分说明
市场失灵法是最具影响力的商业伦理理论之一。它之所以在这一领域备受关注,在很大程度上是因为它摒弃了道德主义和任何形式的应用伦理方法,而是倾向于关注经济活动在制度上体现的目标,即帕累托效率。从这种对市场目标或目的的阐述中,可以得出一系列效率要求,这些要求被认为是市场的隐含道德。然而,市场失灵方法并没有充分解释市场行为者的道德动机基础,即个人自觉遵守规范市场交易的道德准则的原因。我认为,这种失败源于对市场目的的错误界定。在解释了这一未能解决道德动机问题的原因之后,我认为,一种被理解为自我所有权形式的独特自由模式更适合被视为市场的目的,这一目标实际上激发了市场参与者的个人活力。然后,我认为这种自由的概念与责任的概念有着内在的联系,而这种责任的概念可以被更恰当地理解为涉及一系列以促进互利交易为重点的市场美德。因此,自由与责任之间的联系源于个人在市场环境中使其自由合法化的需求,为道德动机的自觉意识提供了基础。因此,这种方法在解决道德动机问题的同时,也更好地把握了市场的隐性道德。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Human Values
Journal of Human Values SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
14.30%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The Journal of Human Values is a peer-reviewed tri-annual journal devoted to research on values. Communicating across manifold knowledge traditions and geographies, it presents cutting-edge scholarship on the study of values encompassing a wide range of disciplines in the humanities and social sciences. Reading values broadly, the journal seeks to encourage and foster a meaningful conversation among scholars for whom values are no esoteric resources to be archived uncritically from the past. Moving beyond cultural boundaries, the Journal looks at values as something that animates the contemporary in its myriad manifestations: politics and public affairs, business and corporations, global institutions and local organisations, and the personal and the private.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信