Markets, Choice and Agency.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Abstract John Tomasi’s Free Market Fairness (2012) introduces several powerful
arguments in favour of a novel and surprising thesis: the best way to realize Rawls’s
principles of justice is a free market society, rather than the arrangements that Rawls
himself believed would best promote justice. In this paper, I adduce three arguments
against Tomasi. First, I suggest that his view rests on a faulty understanding of what
constitutes conventional property rights. Second, I argue that many market solutions
generate choices which are not valuable ones for the agent to have to make. Third, I
show that many choices created by the market systems Tomasi favours create the
illusion that citizens are making their own choices when in fact they are not. I
suggest that taken together these three arguments are sufficient to defend Rawlsian
institutional arrangements against Tomasi’s challenge.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)347
Number of pages361
JournalRes Publica
Volume21
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2015

Keywords

  • Tomasi, Autonomy, Rawls

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Markets, Choice and Agency.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this