ArticlePublisher preview available

Do disruptions to the market process corrupt our morals?

Authors:
Rosemarie Fike at Texas Christian University
Rosemarie Fike
Read publisher preview
Download citation
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the author.

Abstract

Storr and Choi (2019) present ample evidence that the market process results in outcomes that can be considered “moral”, however they do not address the potential moral implications of policy interventions that place restrictions on the market process. This essay poses, and begins to answer, a related question: is it immoral to stand in the way of the market process? Insights from market process theory are used to explore this question and to identify four ways in which impediments to markets, and not markets themselves, have the potential to corrupt our moral character: 1. They prevent people from accessing the benefits markets have been shown to provide. 2. They create incentives that encourage people to practice behaviors that are considered immoral. 3. They prevent people from actively participating in the development of their own moral character. 4. They prevent us from discovering new social rules that are morally superior to the ones that currently exist.
A preview of this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
Learn more
Content available from The Review of Austrian Economics
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Vol.:(0123456789)
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11138-022-00575-y
1 3
Do disruptions tothemarket process corrupt our morals?
RosemarieFike1
Accepted: 5 January 2022
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
2022
Abstract
Storr and Choi (2019) present ample evidence that the market process results in out-
comes that can be considered “moral”, however they do not address the potential
moral implications of policy interventions that place restrictions on the market pro-
cess. This essay poses, and begins to answer, a related question: is it immoral to
stand in the way of the market process? Insights from market process theory are
used to explore this question and to identify four ways in which impediments to mar-
kets, and not markets themselves, have the potential to corrupt our moral charac-
ter: 1. They prevent people from accessing the benefits markets have been shown to
provide. 2. They create incentives that encourage people to practice behaviors that
are considered immoral. 3. They prevent people from actively participating in the
development of their own moral character. 4. They prevent us from discovering new
social rules that are morally superior to the ones that currently exist.
Keywords Market process· Morality· Doux commerce
J.E.L. Codes B52· B53· P10
1 Introduction
Critics of markets, and even some of their greatest champions, have long been con-
cerned about the impact that commercial life might have on our moral character.
Markets, and the extensive division of labor that they create, have been argued to
exploit the poor (Marx, 1867 2010), create unintelligent masses (Smith, 1776
1976), discriminate against women and minorities (Folbre, 2009; Nussbaum, 2000),
and cultivate a cold, calculating nature that may provide an advantage in market
competition.
* Rosemarie Fike
Rosemarie.Fike@tcu.edu
1 Department ofEconomics, Texas Christian University, FortWorth, TX, USA
The Review of Austrian Economics (2023) 36:99–106
/Published online: 12 January 2022
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
... FeldmanHall and Vives, Niemi and Nichols, and Purzycki and Bendixen, and the reader may want to explore additional work on the interplay between economic and moral behavior (Vila-Henninger, 2021) and on the moral impact of exposure to market processes (Bartling & Özdemir, 2023;Enke, 2023;Fike, 2023). The connection between behavioral economics paradigms and computational and cognitive neuroscience measures is another interesting recent direction (Fornari et al., 2023;Lengersdorff et al., 2020). ...
Modern moral psychology: A guide to the terrain
Chapter
  • Feb 2025
The term moral psychology is commonly used in at least two different senses. In the history of philosophy, moral psychology has referred to a branch of moral philosophy that addresses conceptual and theoretical questions about the psychological basis of morality, often (but not always) from a normative perspective (Tiberius, 2015). In the empirical investigations of psychology, anthropology, sociology, and adjacent fields, moral psychology has examined the cognitive, social, and cultural mechanisms that serve moral judgment and decision making, including emotions, norms, and values, as well as biological and evolutionary contributions to the foundations of morality. Since 2010, over 6,000 articles in academic journals have investigated the nature of morality from a descriptive-empirical perspective, and this is the perspective the current handbook emphasizes. Our overarching goal in this volume, however, is to bring philosophical and psychological perspectives on moral psychology into closer contact while maintaining a commitment to empirical science as the foundation of evidence. Striving toward this goal, we have tried to cast a wide net of questions and approaches, but naturally we could not cover all topics, issues, and positions. We offer some guidance to omitted topics later in this introduction, which we hope will allow the reader to take first steps into those additional domains. The chapters try to strike a balance between being up to date in a fast-moving field and making salient insights that have garnered attention for an extended time.
View
... In particular, Betty may recognize that, although not all entrepreneurial intuitions may turn out to be correct, the process of improving the overall allocation of resources, and the chance of introducing products and services that improve the lives of fellow members of the community, partly depends upon a process of discovery that takes advantage of entrepreneurs' failed attempts (Cowen, 2020). Therefore, loss due to entrepreneurial failure still relevantly contributes to the welfare of society, and, as such, may reinforce individuals' self-esteem when market functioning is properly understood (Fike, 2022;Van Schoelandt, 2022). ...
Market Participation, Self-respect, and Risk Tolerance
Article
Full-text available
  • Mar 2023
  • J BUS ETHICS
How important is the experience of risk in business endeavors for self-respect and moral development? Tomasi prompts this question with his attempt to reconcile Rawls's theory of justice as fairness with free-market capitalism, by claiming that economic activity is a way for people to exercise their autonomy, responsibility, and self-authorship, including through voluntary risk-taking. Critics argue that the social environment generated through market institutions is ill-suited for developing a sense of responsibility and autonomy among citizens. We refine the case for economic liberty by looking at the link between risk-taking and attitudes toward democratic citizenship. We highlight the critical role of ethical business practice as a contributor to the stability of liberal-democratic societies.
View
View
Economic freedom and materialism: an empirical analysis
Article
Full-text available
  • Mar 2020
  • Consititut Polit Econ
While economists have found a positive relationship between norms like generalized trust and economic growth, several scholars outside of economics have argued that there is a tradeoff between economic growth and morality. In particular, they argue that as markets develop, market values, e.g. a focus on money and material possessions, also increase. In this article we empirically test this claim using data from the Economic Freedom of the World project, the World Bank, and the World Values Surveys. Our findings suggest that countries with more economic freedom, i.e. those countries that embrace markets to a greater extent, are less materialistic. We also find that countries with a higher GDP per capita are correlated with less materialism.
View
Economic freedom and quality of life: Evidence from the OECD’s your better life index
Article
Full-text available
  • Jan 2014
Measures of material standards of living such as gross domestic product dominate national debates on social and economic progress. Such measures, however, often fail to capture important dimensions of quality of life related to the strength of social networks, quality of education, frequency of civic engagement, personal health, and psychological well-being. In this paper, I provide some preliminary evidence on the relationship between economic freedom and more than twenty indicators of quality of life separated into eleven dimensions of well-being from a recently developed well-being index, Your Better Life Index, by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). I find that economic freedom is strongly and positively correlated with most of these areas of well-being even after I control for the positive impact of income. More importantly, however, the strongest effect of economic freedom is associated with some of the nonmaterial dimensions of quality of life such as community, safety, and life satisfaction, which are still underresearched areas in the economic freedom literature. Additional evidence from the Human Development Index from 1972 to 2010 for a large set of developed and developing countries further shows that changes in economic freedom foster human development in both the short run (five years) and the long run (ten years).
View
Do Markets Corrupt Our Morals?
Book
  • Jan 2019
The most damning criticism of markets is that they are morally corrupting. As we increasingly engage in market activity, the more likely we are to become selfish, corrupt, rapacious and debased. Even Adam Smith, who famously celebrated markets, believed that there were moral costs associated with life in market societies. This book explores whether or not engaging in market activities is morally corrupting. Storr and Choi demonstrate that people in market societies are wealthier, healthier, happier and better connected than those of societies where markets are more restricted. More provocatively, they explain that successful markets require and produce virtuous participants. Markets serve as moral spaces that both rely on and reward their participants for being virtuous. Rather than harming individuals morally, the market is an arena where individuals are encouraged to be their best moral selves. Do Markets Corrupt Our Morals? invites us to reassess the claim that markets corrupt our morals.
View
The Hayek–Friedman hypothesis on the press: is there an association between economic freedom and press freedom?
Article
  • Jul 2017
The Hayek–Friedman hypothesis states that economic freedom is causally associated with stable democracy. I test a particular element of the hypothesis focusing on press freedom, which is arguably a necessary component of any democratic polity. Combining the Freedom House index of press freedom and the Heritage Foundation Index of Economic Freedom yields a large annual panel dataset between 1993 and 2011. Estimates show that improvements in economic freedom are associated with subsequent improvements of press freedom. The overall association is mainly driven by changes in market openness.
View
View
View
Regulation and corruption
Article
  • Jun 2015
Higher levels of government expenditures and more regulation naturally invite corruption, because they provide the opportunity for government officials to be paid off for regulatory favors, subsidies, and government contracts. Some countries have relatively large governments but lower levels of corruption. Scandinavian countries offer examples. While institutional differences may explain some of the cross-country differences in corruption, the most consistent relationship is that high levels of regulation are associated with more corruption. When looking at the effect of the size of government, it is the regulatory state, rather than the productive or redistributive state, that is associated with corruption.
View
View
View
Women and Human Development
Book
  • Mar 2000
In this major book Martha Nussbaum, one of the most innovative and influential philosophical voices of our time, proposes a kind of feminism that is genuinely international, argues for an ethical underpinning to all thought about development planning and public policy, and dramatically moves beyond the abstractions of economists and philosophers to embed thought about justice in the concrete reality of the struggles of poor women. Nussbaum argues that international political and economic thought must be sensitive to gender difference as a problem of justice, and that feminist thought must begin to focus on the problems of women in the third world. Taking as her point of departure the predicament of poor women in India, she shows how philosophy should undergird basic constitutional principles that should be respected and implemented by all governments, and used as a comparative measure of quality of life across nations.
View