Markets with and without Limits

Posted on by under book review, ethics, General announcements, libertarianism, liberty and the left, moralism

Some more bragging to compensate for the free-riding modesty of PoT’s bloggers: Roderick Long has an article out on the dispute over markets with and without limits: “The Limits of Anti-Anti-Commodification Arguments: James Stacey Taylor in Markets with Limits versus Jason Brennan and Peter Jaworski in Markets without Limits,” International Journal of Applied Philosophy, vol. 37:2 (Fall 2023), pp. 1-10. The publication date is given as 2023, but the issue just came out.

Here’s the abstract:

James Stacey Taylor, in his book Markets With Limits, argues that Jason Brennan and Peter Jaworski, in their book Markets Without Limits, systematically mischaracterize the views of the anti-commodification theorists they are critiquing, attributing to them positions (e.g., semiotic essentialism and an asymmetry thesis) that they do not hold. Further, Taylor offers an anti-commodification hypothesis of his own to explain why talented academics like Brennan and Jaworski could fall into such systematic mistakes – namely, that the intrusion of market norms into academia incentivizes scholars to prioritize original arguments in prominent venues over careful fact-checking. I argue that Taylor is correct in charging that Brennan and Jaworski have gotten their opponents’ views wrong; and I show how their subsequent replies to Taylor’s criticisms have been unconvincing. I also argue, however, that Taylor may be over-hasty in identifying the likely causes of their errors.

Those lacking a subscription to the journal or access to a university library may purchase the article through the Philosophy Documentation Center for $20. The irony.

9 thoughts on “Markets with and without Limits”

            • Apropos of markets with and without limits: I had a conversation the other day with a Guatemalan migrant who told me that a relative of his back home was scheduled to have heart surgery in a few months. She didn’t have enough money for the surgery, so the hospital asked instead for payment in blood donations: they instructed her to get six people to donate blood to the hospital. Apparently, she managed to do so, so the surgery is now scheduled.

              I wasn’t aware that this was now common practice in developing countries, but apparently it is.

              Like

              Reply

                • It was related to me as an essentially positive story, focusing on the “So the surgery is a go!” part of it. Unfortunately, my Spanish wasn’t good enough to make the further observation that the blood-for-surgery payment method certainly cuts down on any administrative costs associated with denial management. But it happens to be true.

                  Like

  2. Those lacking a subscription to the journal or access to a university library may purchase the article through the Philosophy Documentation Center for $20.

    Alternatively, you could drop me a line.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment