We live in systems

Nature and society are systemic but our disciplines partition these systems to suit our convenience rather than to fit the phenomena we seek to analyze. In this chapter 1 seek to show the importance of a systemic, multidisciplinary approach to the market experience, illustrating it by showing the interlocking nature of several of the main criticisms of the market.

There are five major targets of criticism of the market: influence on politics, efficiency, distributive justice, personality, and quality of life. Market influences on any one of these also influence the other four; hence criticism of market influences on any one implies something about the others. As the ecologists say, “You can't do just one thing.” In this discussion I shall combine the last two targets of criticism, personality and the quality of life, under the heading of the market experience, and in the interest of brevity I will omit political influences. Efficiency (productivity), justice, and personality are intimately interrelated (in a tripartite system each element has two relationships, one with each of the other elements; the numbering system reflects this set of relationships, e.g., l.a, l.b; 2.a, 2.b, etc.):

1.a. Levels of efficiency and productivity affect justice. Most obviously, a just distribution depends upon production, and the relief of poverty requires resources. Many justice theorists have recognized this. Vlastos once pointed out that any just custodian of goods must, as a condition of his fiduciary responsibilities, maximize the resources available to his wards; as Rawls reminds us, even egalitarians must make provision for resource development unless they prize equality over wellbeing. In quite a different sense, economic growth permits Pareto optimal increments to the poor.