Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-05T19:40:42.580Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

FRATERNITY: WHY THE MARKET NEED NOT BE A MORALLY FREE ZONE*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2008

Luigino Bruni  and
Robert Sugden
Luigino Bruni
Affiliation:
Università Milano-Bicocca
Robert Sugden
Affiliation:
University of East Anglia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper reappraises the idea, traceable to Adam Smith, of a fundamental distinction between market transactions and genuinely social relationships. On Smith's account, each party to a market transaction pursues his own interests, subject only to the law of contract. Using the work of Smith's contemporary Antonio Genovesi as our starting point, we reconstruct an alternative understanding of market interactions as instances of a wider class of reciprocal relationships in civil society, characterized by joint intentions for mutual assistance. We consider the implications of our arguments for current debates about whether marketed personal care services can be genuinely caring.

Type
Essay
Information
Economics & Philosophy , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , March 2008 , pp. 35 - 64
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Akerlof, G. 1982. Labor contracts as partial gift exchange. Quarterly Journal of Economics 97: 543–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bacharach, M. 2006. Beyond Individual Choice, eds. Gold, N. and Sugden, R.. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolton, G. and Ockenfels, A.. 2000. ERC: A theory of equity, reciprocity, and competition. American Economic Review 90: 166–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bratman, M. 1993. Shared intention. Ethics 104: 97–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brennan, G. 1996. Selection and the currency of reward. In The Theory of Institutional Design, ed. Goodin, R., 256–75. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruni, L. 2006. Civil Happiness: Economics and Human Flourishing in Historical Perspective. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruni, L. and Sugden, R.. 2000. Moral canals: trust and social capital in the works of Hume, Smith and Genovesi. Economics and Philosophy 16: 21–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deci, E. and Ryan, R.. 1985. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-determination in Human Behavior. Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fehr, E. and Schmidt, K.. 1999. A theory of fairness, competition and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics 114: 817–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folbre, N. and Nelson, J.. 2000. For love or money – or both? Journal of Economic Perspectives 14: 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, R. 1985. Choosing the Right Pond: Human Behavior and the Quest for Status. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Frey, B. 1997. Not Just for the Money: An Economic Theory of Personal Motivation. Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Gambetta, D. 1993. The Sicilian Mafia: The Business of Private Protection. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gauthier, D. 1986. Morals by Agreement. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Genovesi, A. 2005 [1765–67]. Delle Lezioni di Commercio o sia di Economia Civile. Instituto Italiano per gli Studi Filofící, Napoli.Google Scholar
Gilbert, M. 1989. On Social Facts. Routledge.Google Scholar
Gold, N. and Sugden, R.. 2007. Collective intentions and team agency. Journal of Philosophy 104: 109–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayek, F. 1948. Individualism and Economic Order. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Heyes, A. 2005. The economics of vocation, or ‘Why is a badly-paid nurse a good nurse?’ Journal of Health Economics 24: 561–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hodgson, D. 1967. Consequences of Utilitarianism. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hurley, S. 1989. Natural Reasons. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Katz, E. and Handy, F.. 1998. The wage differential between non-profit institutions and corporations: getting more by paying less? Journal of Comparative Economics 26: 246–61.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1988 [1869]. The Subjection of Women. Hackett.Google Scholar
Nelson, J. 2005. Interpersonal relations and economics: comments from a feminist perspective. In Economics and Social Interaction: Accounting for Interpersonal Relations, eds. Gui, B. and Sugden, R., 250–61. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, R. 1993. Making Democracy Work. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rabin, M. 1993. Incorporating fairness into game theory and economics. American Economic Review 83: 1281–302.Google Scholar
Regan, D. 1980. Utilitarianism and Cooperation. Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, R. and Deci, E.. 2000. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25: 54–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Searle, J. 1990. Collective intentions and actions. In Intentions in Communication, ed. Cohen, P., Morgan, J. and Pollack, M., 401–15. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A. 1976 [1759]. The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Smith, A. 1976 [1776]. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Sugden, R. 1984. Reciprocity: the supply of public goods through voluntary contributions. Economic Journal 94: 772–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugden, R. 1993. Thinking as a team: toward an explanation of nonselfish behavior. Social Philosophy and Policy 10: 69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugden, R. 2002. Beyond sympathy and empathy: Adam Smith's concept of fellow-feeling. Economics and Philosophy 18: 63–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugden, R. 2005. Fellow-feeling. In Economics and Social Interaction: Accounting for Interpersonal Relations, eds. Gui, B. and Sugden, R., 52–75. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuomela, R. and Miller, K.. 1988. We-intentions. Philosophical Studies 53: 367–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar