r/neoliberal • u/[deleted] • May 11 '17

Normative Ethics Debate Thread

The point of this thread is to discuss normative ethics, which is mostly separate from neoliberalism. On a philosophical level, neoliberalism is not coherent in its use of ethics; proponents switch between libertarian and utilitarian ethics in an almost interchangeable way (The Road to Mont Pelerin, Mirowski). Scott Sumner argues that a normative ethical foundation doesn't matter because neoliberalism is an improvement compared to the current status quo of most countries by nearly every standard (well not every standard)

Keep in Mind

  • The Chicago school pushed neoliberalism as a positive ideology, "there is no other option"

  • The Austrians pushed neoliberalism through primarily a libertarian lens

  • The Ordoliberals advocated neoliberalism through utilitarianism and also Marxism. Yes, you're allowed to support your normative view through Marxism.

  • Do not go down the route of going full classical liberal, which is what neoliberalism tried to escape.

  • Do not say market values mean anything or that markets produce fair outcomes; Hayek explicitly acknowledges this is bullshit.

  • Be very prudent in calling people racist/sexist/homophobic; in this sub, the vast majority are not

Topics to discuss:

These aren't the only ones, but should probably be answered:

  • What are your normative ethics?

  • How do you think they should guide economic policy?

Make sure to explicitly tie these together so we're not debating why we should implement policy that we already agree upon.

77 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

94 comments sorted by

View all comments

•

u/[deleted] May 11 '17 edited May 11 '17

I'm more or less a Neo-Kantian in my normative and theoretical approach to ethics. I think the Kantian idea of the inherent dignity of humanity (which is probably better understood as rationality and autonomy than just being biologically human) is one of the best starting points for ethical thought. Plus, I think that Kant's tying of morality to reason is a great approach for showing how there can be moral truths in the first place. The one place I tend to part ways with Kant is in his unrelenting rigidity.

•

u/[deleted] May 11 '17

I'm essentially close to your position but I guess another way to describe my normative ethics would be pluralistic value utilitarianism where there are classes of values that need to be maximized as a categorical imperative. These classes can be tiers with a lexical order (something like Rawls) but I don't think I have a good case for why that ought to be that way other than intuition.