"They don't worry about the morality of the activity they are engaged in", "I don't think it fits the American psyche, I think American are too individual", "there is too much emphasis on getting ahead". Posner's take on individuality and freedom only apply to the very well off, which shows how out of touch he is with the average person in the USA. This kind of attitude is what encouraged the corporate takeover of our government, allowing wages to stagnate while the costs of the basic necessities of life have tripled or more in cost. There is no getting ahead, there is only falling behind for the majority of Americans and this man Posner is one of the architects who built the system which is extracting everything of value from the life of the average American.
They both overlooked important points in the life insurance example: when the janitor gives consent to be insured it's because he/she trusts that the company buying the insurance will not attempt to shorten their life, and will not resell the insurance to another party that will attempt to shorten the janitors life. Similarly the insurance company will not want to sell to any company that it thinks might attempt to shorten the life of the insured, or that might resell the insurance to another party that would do, since this would result in a loss for the insurance company. Furthermore, anyone in the company that tries to shorten the life of the janitor risks much more than they personally gain (life imprisonment for themselves vs money for the company). So I think its very unlikely that the insurance scheme bought by the company is going to increase the janitors risk of death any more than a personal life insurance scheme.
It's a vicious cycle of deep social atomization (euphemistically called individualism by him) and markets. In turn, they feed on each other, using human beings as fuel, literally. Posner's archetypal demeanor illustrates atomization. Privileged cozy creep, devoid of real life experience, speculating what unprivileged do voluntarily or not. It would be funny if he was not an influential figure and one of many like this. I wouldn't be surprised if Simpsons' Mr Burns was partly inspired by this living, disgusting archetype (as a public and influential figure, not human being). Though to be honest, I can glimpse that some humanity still resides somewhere deep inside him. He is not a complete, tragic caricature.
Devoid of real life experience? Posner was a Judge and the 7th Circuit US Court of Appeals for probably longer than you have lived. The published more books than the number of years you went to school.
There may be some truth to the criticisms, but I think you're projecting too much on Posner to make him look like a stereotypical figure and then you're attacking that image
@@fsabouni it is not just these things. The fact is that we have always been a market society. Most social relationships in adult life have always been transactional, motivated by gain, security, etc., most conspicuous being marriage.
Finally, Richard Posner didn't answer the important question: "SHOULD we be concern about the morality of the activities we are engaged in?" He evaded the issue by saying he thinks it does not fits the American psyche... so I'm afraid (in a good sense) deeply inside he thinks we should consider the moral aspect in some realms. Michael Sandel got him
I think americans want a socialistic floor and a capitalistic ceiling, instead of a purely capitalistic system. Posner is overgeneralizing americans. It appears false that americans dont concern themselves with morality, as the law is contained in the study of ethics, and americans use the law constantly. Yes there is a portion of america that minds their own business. But thats not all of america. It almost seems as if he is saying american culture is unchangeable. That is similar to saying the current state of society is perfect, which i just dont believe. Ethics is a broader system than an exchange between two individuals. One has to consider the possibilities of harm to others, of future harm, and of environmental harm. And i wouldnt say most americans dont care about morality as much as they find it difficult (it is still a philosophical quandary). I just couldnt get into the framing of the conversation. Much preferred to hear about what an ethical economic system would look like, than whether americans would do it or not. And there was no distinct meaning for morality. Does he think markets should be unregulated? It doesnt seem so because he said slaves shouldnt be sold. But then he says tricking people is seen as the normal course of action as long as no real harm is done. All that does is present more questions.
I think "Humans" (not just your nation!) do not know what they require for social stability, because they have not been presented with a viable alternative in a way that makes sense to their individual value systems. Today, profit is the world's main objective. Not to learn, not to aspire, develop, to protect the environment, save its inhabitants, etc. *Rapacity.* Does that not sound kind of.. crazy?
I am absolutely horrified by this entire video. Is this the type of thought process that people refer to when they rail against elitist institutions of higher education? This conversation was just gross.
I found it both Disturbing and Informative. Posner's position was a glimpse of the most problematic aspects of current "Capitalist" thinking, but at the same time I rather like his willingness to just lay bare the dark recesses of his mind on the subject.
Are you special needs? This man, this judge, this wonderful pragmatic human is light years ahead of basically 99 percent of the human species. The fact that some no-name, unlettered, self-righteous, screwball elects to pop off about a person and the subjects that person is talking about proves not a lick. I wonder what your specialty is. Let me guess, accessing people clinically after watching them appear on CNN? Get a life.
Can markets corrupt social values? That can only depend on the type of values a society holds. If a society doesn't believe in limiting the commodification of *things*, even a human life, then no the markets would be supportive of that society's values. If a society values, holds dear, ideas beyond just their market value (buy and sell price), then the market *will corrupt* as some people try and find a way to profit from that which was once exchanged freely.
Guys, We have two points of view:1. Since Sandel's Aproach, the point is what it should be, not all social values have to be based on market values. 2. Since Posner's perspective the point is what is possible to do with markets or how to improve the social wealth. Posner, says that it's impossible to regulate a morality to society. I think that Sandel isn't considering the limits of social complexity and the risk of regulation of moral (moral according who?, Kant, Ralws, Mill, etc?). But, Posner has a ideological more than econonomic defense of market. If You said "The prostitution is not moral, so we have to punish that", the reality is that the people will continue demanding and supplying prostitution. This has two questions: Is prostituion inmoral? and is the social wealth better with permission o whitout it? Sandel is for the first question and Posner, the second. I think (and probably Posner) that the second question is more relevant. But we have externalities and markes fails that Posner doesn't consider in this interview that is related to social values. The real economic perspective considers fails of markets.
Its alright if it is done by 'informed consent'. Well yes, but how do we ensure that? And if these things becomes an option, there are those who will feel pressured into using them, don't we have a moral obligation to protect those?
But everyone is. Everyone has their own interest in economic sense. I guess there some small percentage of people that are selfless but they are 0.0005%
marketization is just what results form giving people more freedom of action, if more degrees of freedom 'corrupt' people, so be it, but paternalism is no way to go
"Exploiting inherent psychological weaknesses is how things are done" Richard Posner commits a typical fallacy: he invokes how things are done as a reason for how things should be done. This is not a valid argument. Further, exploiting weakness is coercion, whether physical or mental. If Posner believes coercion violates rights, then "how things are done" violates rights. Of course, consistency never bothered Posner. He cornered the market for incoherent drivel years ago.
What gives this guy (Richard Posner) the right to dictate morals? First off... he is a lawyer not a theologian, humanitarian or even a scientist. He doesn't have any ground to stand on and his opinions show that. I typically like to watch the New Economic Thinking channel but this guy is awful. No one should listen to his moral opinions. Please pose this question to someone who has some moral standing.
A Man from the Chicago-University but with Moral-Values. In the states this guy is left-wing, rather, chilean-terms the cuantification would be more discrete. Love it.
I like the opening chuckle, man. Happy thoughts go to you watching to help spread fix the non communications of rip-off corporate values make that undermine the population.
I really liked this kind of content, I want to hear other views and have them challenged rationally rather than simply disregarding or demonizing them. At the end there were some words, "we need to talk", I'm hoping that there are more of these types of conversations across the aisle.
Just goes to show how indoctrinated we all are. Anytime you apply a language of universal uniformity to the social system - they say things like "That's just how things are" & then they just fling "Communism" into the conversation in a desperate attempt to dissuade the logic. There are much better systems for social values we could affirm today. We could all live like kings, stress free, crime free, in abundance. With the soul purpose to learn. It's stuffy old ideals entrenched in corruption & avarice like this which holds back our abilities as a race.
This is a ridiculous position to hold by Richard because obviously markets are eroding social values and morality as a thing to hold in regard. He points out that this is just what American's are like with their individualistic culture, but the long term consequence of diminished expectations of moral behavior is a social system that can no longer function because the social contract and general good will between citizens evaporates. This is an anti-social cooling effect on a social species in pretty fundamental ways and I think it is very foolish of us to accept these things.
I'm not totally sure if you could say with a complete certain that americans are less xenophobic than foreigners, I mean cause these toleration he speaks about wasn't exactly a decision they made, it was more of a necessity of these people of foreig that americans had to live with in their own country
Good economics were good in permission 👍🏿👍🏿👍🏿👍🏿happening in Indonesia government stolen my inheritance on Suisse insurance bank with fraudy my Indonesia military used by via mrs. Marie Pangestu 🎉mrs. Sri Mulyani🎉mrs. Sutinah Lontoh stolen Silicon Valley Bank in USA🎉🎉🎉
Honestly in my humble opinion that is one evil, duplicitous old asshole. He comes across as somebody who understands the system, and then goes on to speak on behalf of everyone - The majority of whom do not understand the system... Saying that morality should not apply to the market. Honestly I think he's a self-serving snake who's comfortable with him and his peers/clients making immoral business decisions for a buck.
Sad. Obviously he is a regular “John”. Saying he doesn’t believe purchasing sex should NOT be illegal is tragic which means he supports sex trafficking and child exploitation.
5:30 - morality? naah en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal -> "and of course most americans are like that. We're not concerned about the morality of the activities we're engaged in." .. 7:10 "Don't you think we should be concerned about the morality of the activities we're engaged in?" - "I don't think it fits the American psyche"
"They don't worry about the morality of the activity they are engaged in", "I don't think it fits the American psyche, I think American are too individual", "there is too much emphasis on getting ahead".
Posner's take on individuality and freedom only apply to the very well off, which shows how out of touch he is with the average person in the USA. This kind of attitude is what encouraged the corporate takeover of our government, allowing wages to stagnate while the costs of the basic necessities of life have tripled or more in cost. There is no getting ahead, there is only falling behind for the majority of Americans and this man Posner is one of the architects who built the system which is extracting everything of value from the life of the average American.
They both overlooked important points in the life insurance example: when the janitor gives consent to be insured it's because he/she trusts that the company buying the insurance will not attempt to shorten their life, and will not resell the insurance to another party that will attempt to shorten the janitors life.
Similarly the insurance company will not want to sell to any company that it thinks might attempt to shorten the life of the insured, or that might resell the insurance to another party that would do, since this would result in a loss for the insurance company.
Furthermore, anyone in the company that tries to shorten the life of the janitor risks much more than they personally gain (life imprisonment for themselves vs money for the company).
So I think its very unlikely that the insurance scheme bought by the company is going to increase the janitors risk of death any more than a personal life insurance scheme.
It's a vicious cycle of deep social atomization (euphemistically called individualism by him) and markets. In turn, they feed on each other, using human beings as fuel, literally.
Posner's archetypal demeanor illustrates atomization. Privileged cozy creep, devoid of real life experience, speculating what unprivileged do voluntarily or not. It would be funny if he was not an influential figure and one of many like this.
I wouldn't be surprised if Simpsons' Mr Burns was partly inspired by this living, disgusting archetype (as a public and influential figure, not human being).
Though to be honest, I can glimpse that some humanity still resides somewhere deep inside him. He is not a complete, tragic caricature.
Devoid of real life experience? Posner was a Judge and the 7th Circuit US Court of Appeals for probably longer than you have lived. The published more books than the number of years you went to school.
There may be some truth to the criticisms, but I think you're projecting too much on Posner to make him look like a stereotypical figure and then you're attacking that image
@@AB-et6nj I watched it again and honestly, I wouldn't be satisfied with whatever I wrote.
@@fsabouni it is not just these things.
The fact is that we have always been a market society. Most social relationships in adult life have always been transactional, motivated by gain, security, etc., most conspicuous being marriage.
The Banality of Evil
The banality of economic analysis
Finally, Richard Posner didn't answer the important question: "SHOULD we be concern about the morality of the activities we are engaged in?" He evaded the issue by saying he thinks it does not fits the American psyche... so I'm afraid (in a good sense) deeply inside he thinks we should consider the moral aspect in some realms. Michael Sandel got him
I think americans want a socialistic floor and a capitalistic ceiling, instead of a purely capitalistic system. Posner is overgeneralizing americans. It appears false that americans dont concern themselves with morality, as the law is contained in the study of ethics, and americans use the law constantly. Yes there is a portion of america that minds their own business. But thats not all of america. It almost seems as if he is saying american culture is unchangeable. That is similar to saying the current state of society is perfect, which i just dont believe. Ethics is a broader system than an exchange between two individuals. One has to consider the possibilities of harm to others, of future harm, and of environmental harm. And i wouldnt say most americans dont care about morality as much as they find it difficult (it is still a philosophical quandary). I just couldnt get into the framing of the conversation. Much preferred to hear about what an ethical economic system would look like, than whether americans would do it or not. And there was no distinct meaning for morality. Does he think markets should be unregulated? It doesnt seem so because he said slaves shouldnt be sold. But then he says tricking people is seen as the normal course of action as long as no real harm is done. All that does is present more questions.
I think "Humans" (not just your nation!) do not know what they require for social stability, because they have not been presented with a viable alternative in a way that makes sense to their individual value systems.
Today, profit is the world's main objective. Not to learn, not to aspire, develop, to protect the environment, save its inhabitants, etc. *Rapacity.*
Does that not sound kind of.. crazy?
I am absolutely horrified by this entire video. Is this the type of thought process that people refer to when they rail against elitist institutions of higher education? This conversation was just gross.
I found it both Disturbing and Informative. Posner's position was a glimpse of the most problematic aspects of current "Capitalist" thinking, but at the same time I rather like his willingness to just lay bare the dark recesses of his mind on the subject.
Always like hearing Mr Sandel talk. Thanks I do have to say though that the Posner fellow if bloody scary
I'd enjoy a discussion between Sandel and Dr. Wolff. Please invite him for a talk, I'm sure he'd be happy to oblige.
this is what sociopath looks like. and this guy was a judge on appeals court for 35 years.
Are you special needs? This man, this judge, this wonderful pragmatic human is light years ahead of basically 99 percent of the human species. The fact that some no-name, unlettered, self-righteous, screwball elects to pop off about a person and the subjects that person is talking about proves not a lick. I wonder what your specialty is. Let me guess, accessing people clinically after watching them appear on CNN? Get a life.
@@l2l3l9 Good afternoon! Is your response directed towards me or to the wildly incompetent Pudd'nhead posting above me?
11:31 Posner gave a honourable finger!!
Can markets corrupt social values?
That can only depend on the type of values a society holds.
If a society doesn't believe in limiting the commodification of *things*, even a human life, then no the markets would be supportive of that society's values.
If a society values, holds dear, ideas beyond just their market value (buy and sell price), then the market *will corrupt* as some people try and find a way to profit from that which was once exchanged freely.
2:07 "the laws against nothing are 100% effective"
understatement of the century. i quote him in _our american injustice system_ my new book.
the laws against nothing are not 100% effective, icant do law enforcement to some ancient tribes
I noticed that this interview was posted in late 2018 - does anyone know when it was filmed? Was it conducted after Posner's 2017 retirement?
Guys, We have two points of view:1. Since Sandel's Aproach, the point is what it should be, not all social values have to be based on market values. 2. Since Posner's perspective the point is what is possible to do with markets or how to improve the social wealth. Posner, says that it's impossible to regulate a morality to society. I think that Sandel isn't considering the limits of social complexity and the risk of regulation of moral (moral according who?, Kant, Ralws, Mill, etc?). But, Posner has a ideological more than econonomic defense of market. If You said "The prostitution is not moral, so we have to punish that", the reality is that the people will continue demanding and supplying prostitution. This has two questions: Is prostituion inmoral? and is the social wealth better with permission o whitout it? Sandel is for the first question and Posner, the second. I think (and probably Posner) that the second question is more relevant. But we have externalities and markes fails that Posner doesn't consider in this interview that is related to social values. The real economic perspective considers fails of markets.
Its alright if it is done by 'informed consent'.
Well yes, but how do we ensure that? And if these things becomes an option, there are those who will feel pressured into using them, don't we have a moral obligation to protect those?
"Every American is individualistic" is a contradictory statement.
But everyone is. Everyone has their own interest in economic sense. I guess there some small percentage of people that are selfless but they are 0.0005%
Did he gave the camera the finger at the end?
marketization is just what results form giving people more freedom of action, if more degrees of freedom 'corrupt' people, so be it, but paternalism is no way to go
"Exploiting inherent psychological weaknesses is how things are done" Richard Posner commits a typical fallacy: he invokes how things are done as a reason for how things should be done. This is not a valid argument. Further, exploiting weakness is coercion, whether physical or mental. If Posner believes coercion violates rights, then "how things are done" violates rights. Of course, consistency never bothered Posner. He cornered the market for incoherent drivel years ago.
What gives this guy (Richard Posner) the right to dictate morals? First off... he is a lawyer not a theologian, humanitarian or even a scientist. He doesn't have any ground to stand on and his opinions show that. I typically like to watch the New Economic Thinking channel but this guy is awful. No one should listen to his moral opinions. Please pose this question to someone who has some moral standing.
@MrHalified Its even worse than both of you think. He is considered one of the top most cited legal scholars of the 20th century.
He's not dictating any morals, on the contrary he is refuting the moral claims tacitly implied by Michael Sandels probing questions.
0:17 demon laugh
not profiting, not exist
that is the moral foundation of all
A Man from the Chicago-University but with Moral-Values. In the states this guy is left-wing, rather, chilean-terms the cuantification would be more discrete. Love it.
I like the opening chuckle, man. Happy thoughts go to you watching to help spread fix the non communications of rip-off corporate values make that undermine the population.
The guy's logic reminds me of Heidegger , and his affect of Bela Lugosi. No wonder the Right wanted him to be chief justice
I am on the Right and reject Posner's nihilism.
This dude is pro-abortion. He had no chance as a justice.
I really liked this kind of content, I want to hear other views and have them challenged rationally rather than simply disregarding or demonizing them. At the end there were some words, "we need to talk", I'm hoping that there are more of these types of conversations across the aisle.
Just goes to show how indoctrinated we all are. Anytime you apply a language of universal uniformity to the social system - they say things like "That's just how things are" & then they just fling "Communism" into the conversation in a desperate attempt to dissuade the logic.
There are much better systems for social values we could affirm today. We could all live like kings, stress free, crime free, in abundance. With the soul purpose to learn. It's stuffy old ideals entrenched in corruption & avarice like this which holds back our abilities as a race.
This is a ridiculous position to hold by Richard because obviously markets are eroding social values and morality as a thing to hold in regard. He points out that this is just what American's are like with their individualistic culture, but the long term consequence of diminished expectations of moral behavior is a social system that can no longer function because the social contract and general good will between citizens evaporates. This is an anti-social cooling effect on a social species in pretty fundamental ways and I think it is very foolish of us to accept these things.
Blood diamonds?
This guy is a judge? That is scary
I'm not totally sure if you could say with a complete certain that americans are less xenophobic than foreigners, I mean cause these toleration he speaks about wasn't exactly a decision they made, it was more of a necessity of these people of foreig that americans had to live with in their own country
And I’m still wondering... why he laugh so much? Scary...
I know right..
Good economics were good in permission 👍🏿👍🏿👍🏿👍🏿happening in Indonesia government stolen my inheritance on Suisse insurance bank with fraudy my Indonesia military used by via mrs. Marie Pangestu 🎉mrs. Sri Mulyani🎉mrs. Sutinah Lontoh stolen Silicon Valley Bank in USA🎉🎉🎉
Posner ❤️
Honestly in my humble opinion that is one evil, duplicitous old asshole. He comes across as somebody who understands the system, and then goes on to speak on behalf of everyone - The majority of whom do not understand the system... Saying that morality should not apply to the market.
Honestly I think he's a self-serving snake who's comfortable with him and his peers/clients making immoral business decisions for a buck.
He’s aaaaallllmost there…almost.
This guys reasoning is scary!
Hello,i from Indonesian.
Sad. Obviously he is a regular “John”. Saying he doesn’t believe purchasing sex should NOT be illegal is tragic which means he supports sex trafficking and child exploitation.
"I'm old as fuck".
A literal capitalist. My god.
the right question is whether social values can corrupt markets
Lol, wtf
What a tragic moral compass he has.
Wait did he just condone prostitution lol
Lol imagine saying Americans are less xenophobia in 2019.
Pure rot.
5:30 - morality? naah en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal -> "and of course most americans are like that. We're not concerned about the morality of the activities we're engaged in." .. 7:10 "Don't you think we should be concerned about the morality of the activities we're engaged in?" - "I don't think it fits the American psyche"