The four essayists, Brian Griffiths, Robert Sirico, Norman Barry and Frank Field approach the issue from their own philosophical standpoints but in general are in agreement that morality and markets are compatible. Norman Barry's paper for me is the most interesting in that he postulates the development of rules from the emergence of a spontaneous order rather than having a pre-established framework of rules or ethics. While others may argue that markets require a framework of rules to operate in and cite minimal government or an established church, Barry's paper opens up the whole question of what constitutes moral and ethical behaviour to begin with.
It is this particular proposition which holds out particular interest for more lectures like this in the future. Historically there have been thoise in favour of the market who wish to circumscribe it's impact and who cite all sorts of reasons such as the possible collapse of society if free markets are allowed free rein. Ranged against that position are those who despise markets altogether and those who believe that free markets bring true freedom. As someone who believes in the latter, it seems to me that the political changes in the world over the last twenty five years or so have resulted in large gains for those who believe in the controlled markets view at the dtriment of followers of the anti-market view. Organised religion has much to lose by increasing choice for individuals, and much to lose by democracy but that is another story, and has resisted strongly.
This collection of essays seems to be the first shot in a major debate between conservatives and classical liberals which will go to the heart of the arguement about the market.
Why only four stars? Well, I would have liked to have read more papers.