#benjamin franks

Michael Sandel provides an example of how shifting relationships onto contractual grounds undermines important social values. His example is of a kindergarten that dealt with the problem of parents turning up late to pick up their children by introducing a charge for late pick-up where previously there had not been one. Instead of the financial charge acting as a disincentive, late pick-ups increased. Previously, parents had recognised that turning up late was discourteous and an imposition on the childcare professionals; however, with the financial charge, their actions were no longer wrong but just an additional service that they had contracted. When the kindergarten returned to the original ‘honour’ system, parents did not immediately revert to their original, more virtuous behaviour. Once a practice has been corrupted by market reasoning, it remains distorted, though it is possible that it might be repaired in time. So too values of friendship, cooperation and solidarity can be undermined if contractualism is brought to bear. Imagine a close acquaintance asking you to sign a ‘friend’s contract’ outlining the obligations of friendship and penalties for violation: one would consider that they had misunderstood the very notion of friendship.

The imposition of a single, universal set of moral principles… means creating institutions capable of imposing this standard. It extends the power of the state and its functionaries, and also restricts the areas for difference and pluralism...identical universal rights or attempts to impose one single law of value (such as the hedonic calculus, or the governance principles of the free-market) onto all would privilege those whose desires fitted this natural order...[But] a view of the good which is based on social practices does not promote uniformity, as distinctive practices have different norms (and agents) and would not require a universal set of regulations to be imposed from outside