Abstract
Socialists and defenders of laissez-faire share the view that in the market agents pursue their self-interest, not the good of others. On this basis, socialists reject the market as an arena of immorality, while laissez-faire theorists attempt to defuse the charge by relying on the providential consequences of the "invisible hand." However, both stances presuppose a view of morality that too sharply separates self-interest and altruism. Some try to separate the economic and morality into discrete spheres. In contrast, a compatibilist account shows the ways a concern for personal profit and a concern for others can come together. Such a motivationalist approach allows one to re-conceive the "invisible hand." It is no longer a serendipitous justification of the merely self-interested, but an invitation to think of the various mixtures of altruism and self-interest required to produce those results that may commend the market.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 80-96 |
| Journal | Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies |
| Volume | 16 |
| Issue number | 1/2 |
| Publication status | Published - 2004 |
Keywords
- Ethical Theory
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Can Individual Morality and Commercial Life be Reconciled?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver