Michael Sandel
Harvard's "Justice" course; critic of Rawls, of market thinking, of meritocracy and of designer children
17 videos analysed · 45 quotes checked word for word · updated 2026-10-19
Key facts
- He gave the 2009 BBC Reith Lectures, "A New Citizenship", on a new politics of the common good. Wikipédia 2026 · Michael Sandel
- Born in Minneapolis in 1953; joined Harvard in 1981; doctorate at Oxford (1985) under Charles Taylor. Wikipédia 2026 · Michael Sandel
- Over 15,000 students took his Justice course in about two decades. Wikipédia 2026 · Michael Sandel
Positions
click a row to see the evidenceHis course ends on Aristotle: justice depends on the purpose of a practice and on civic virtue. He says government cannot stay neutral about the good life. This points to a virtue-and-community view, though he does not use this label here. In 2018 he says: "I also agree with Aristotle, that to live a good life, it's not enough simply to display private virtues", and that civic virtue and moral virtue go both ways. He also rejects applying fixed principles such as Kant's categorical imperative to cases (2026).
No sourced position yet on: God, Source of knowledge, Certainty, Mind and body, Freedom, Status of morality, Faith and reason, Meaning of life, Human nature.
On the big questions
What makes something right?Virtue
Closest camp, by interpretation: the last lectures of his course turn to Aristotle, civic virtue and the good life, after testing utilitarian and Kantian answers.
- Fixed principles cannot be read off like policy: for him philosophy moves back and forth between concrete judgments and wider principles, as with the two trolley cases. Video 2026 · Insider Interview: Acemoglu &…2
- Each tradition of justice (happiness, rights and duties, virtue) is tested on cases; the third asks what a practice is for. Video 2017 · Is Killing Sometimes Justified?…2
- Following Aristotle, a good life needs more than private virtues: it needs deliberating with fellow citizens about the common destiny. Video 2018 · Encountering China: Sandel on…
Moral duties rest on fixed universal principles, not on judging each case as it comes.
He says principles cannot simply be read off like policy: philosophy moves back and forth between concrete judgments and wider principles, as with the two trolley cases.
The right act is the one that produces the greatest total welfare.
He tests it on cases, such as the two trolley cases, to see which principles people really hold, and then presents a third tradition of justice that asks what a practice is for.
See 1 more objections
The state should not promote any idea of virtue: people must be free to choose their own way of life.
He calls for a politics of mutual respect that engages with competing moral and spiritual views, and says it is not about everyone agreeing on the common good.
Mixed : Turning the trolley: one death rather than five, The principle of utility: calculating pleasures and pains, Better to be Socrates dissatisfied: Mill's utilitarianism, No right to lie, not even to the murderer
The question on the site: all the argumentsWhat is a just society?Virtue and harmony
Closest camp: for Sandel, justice cannot be separated from the good life and the common good. A fair society needs civic engagement and a public debate about what is worth pursuing, not only neutral rules. He says the justification of public life cannot be neutral about the good: contributive justice is "not neutral about human flourishing or the best way to live" (2026).
- Markets and technocratic language look neutral, but they let us avoid the hard public debate about the good life. Video 2015 · Are There Things Money Shouldn't…
- A moral void in public life does not stay empty: it gets filled by strident nationalism or fundamentalism. Video 2017 · Davos 2017 - technocratic…2
- Inequality is also a loss of shared life: when classes no longer meet, the common good weakens, so we need class-mixing places such as parks, libraries and schools. Video 2017 · Davos 2017 - An Insight, An Idea…2
- Justice is not neutral about human flourishing: we are most human when we contribute to the common good, so work needs dignity, not only a fair income. Video 2026 · Why 'Merit' Should be Rejected -…2
- He answers the Rawls-Habermas view by saying citizens should not leave their moral and spiritual convictions outside the public square, without asking everyone to agree. Video 2026 · Why Merit Should be Rejected -…
A just state must stay neutral about what makes a good life; the public square should leave moral and religious convictions out.
He answers that citizens should not leave their moral and spiritual convictions outside the public square, without asking everyone to agree.
Markets respect people's free choices and consent, so there is no need to debate what money may or may not buy.
He answers that markets can seem a way of avoiding the hard work of public debate about the good life, and that they may change the meaning of practices and crowd out norms worth caring about.
See 1 more objections
What people earn freely is theirs; taxing it to pursue a pattern of justice is a form of theft.
Defends : To each according to merit: distributive and corrective justiceMixed : Property through labourCriticizes : The veil of ignorance: choosing the rules without knowing who you will be
The question on the site: all the argumentsIn their words
It is folly to create an economy that makes a university diploma a necessary condition of dignified work and a decent life.
The fundamental human need is the need to be needed by those with whom we share a common life.
I don't think of philosophy as a purely academic subject
A friend or an interlocutor doesn't just reflect back to me as if a mirror what I already think or want or desire.
How the ideas evolved
Click a step for details1982Liberalism and the Limits of Justice
He criticises John Rawls. In his view, the veil of ignorance imagines "unencumbered selves", people with no ties. But we are shaped by ties we did not choose, such as family. Rawls later called his theory political, not metaphysical, partly in response.
2004Against designer children
In The Atlantic and at a Brookings debate (31 March 2004), he opposes genetic engineering for enhancement. He sees in it a drive to mastery that overlooks the gifted character of human powers. He also says a meritocracy stays generous only if people see their talents as gifts they did not fully earn.
2007The Case Against Perfection
The book grows out of his Atlantic article and his work on the US President's Council on Bioethics. He argues that parents should accept children as gifts, not as products of their design.
2009Justice goes public
He publishes Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do? The course had been recorded in 2005 and offered online; a 12-episode TV series was broadcast by BBC Four in 2011. The 24 lectures go from Bentham and Mill to Kant, Rawls and Aristotle, and end on the common good.
2012What Money Can't Buy
He argues that some goods, such as human organs, should not be bought and sold, and that market thinking can erode moral values.
2017Skyboxes and the end of class mixing
At Davos he says the elites missed the roots of populist anger: loss of community, disempowerment and lost social esteem. He uses the baseball skybox as a metaphor for places where classes no longer meet, and warns that a technocratic language creates a moral void that strident nationalism fills.
In their words« going to a baseball game was a class mixing experience »Skyboxes stand for the loss of class-mixing places; he calls the decline of shared common citizenship the most corrosive effect of inequality. watch
« the default way of filling the emptiness of meaning in public discourse is a kind of uh strident nationalism »He warns that technocratic talk creates a moral void, filled by strident nationalism. watch
« the laws of the market are not given by Nature we have designed a certain version of global capitalism through political choices »He rejects the idea that the course of the global economy is fixed like the weather: it came from political choices and could be otherwise. watch
2018Chinese philosophy and mutual learning
At a Harvard roundtable on his book's Chinese reception he wants comparative philosophy to be mutual learning through argument, not only a history of ideas. He agrees with Aristotle that a good life needs more than private virtues: it needs deliberating with fellow citizens. He adds that Confucianism used as a ready-made political tool would worry him.
In their words« that is the default source of meaning that fills places whose moral culture has become hollowed out »In a roundtable on Chinese philosophy, he says nationalism fills the void when a moral culture is hollowed out, so a public philosophy rooted in traditions of meaning matters. watch
« for me what motivates an attempt to engage in comparative philosophy is the aspiration for mutual learning »He wants comparative philosophy to be mutual learning through argument, not just a history of ideas. watch
« I also agree with Aristotle, that to live a good life, it's not enough simply to display private virtues »He says living well also requires deliberating with fellow citizens about the collective destiny; civic and moral virtue go both ways. watch
2020The Tyranny of Merit
He argues that the idea that success is entirely deserved makes winners proud and losers humiliated, and weakens the common good. He calls for a renewed debate about the good life and the dignity of work.
2023"I resisted the communitarian label"
In the Netherlands, told that Wikipedia still calls him a communitarian, he answers that he resisted the label: it suggested that justice and rights are merely relative to a community's values, and the real issue was whether justice can be detached from debates about the good life and virtue. He also says elites who governed for fifty or sixty years have a poor record, and calls for forums of deliberation close to affected communities.
In their words« the Highly Educated Elites over the past 50 60 years have a very poor record »Answering panelists, he says the credentialed elites who have governed for fifty years have a poor record, which is why he has sympathy for working people's resentment. watch
« we need to create what we currently lack are forums for deliberation closer to the ground closer to these communities »He says democracy lacks forums for deliberation close to the communities affected, which civil society may have to convene. watch
« some of us resisted the communitarian label for that reason I certainly did »Asked about the communitarian label, he says he resisted it himself, because the movement avoided debates about the good life and virtue. watch
2024AI companions and the Promethean drive
On AI he says a friend challenges us instead of mirroring us, so devices that echo our wishes are a danger. He sees technology as a stance toward the world, the Promethean aspiration to be self-made and self-sufficient, and asks whether that satisfies us. In Vienna he puts the dignity of work at the center of the political agenda, saying individual mobility is not an adequate answer to inequality.
In their words« I speak of the dignity of labor »He says inequality has become inequality of esteem, so he puts the dignity of work at the center, beyond income. watch
« We should focus less, for example, on arming people for meritocratic competition »He prefers dignity of work to preparing people for the meritocratic race. watch
« a friend or an interlocutor doesn't just reflect back to me as if a mirror what I already think or want or desire »On AI companions, he says a friend challenges us instead of mirroring us, one danger of treating devices as persons. watch
2025Civic education beyond privileged places
In a lecture series at Peking University he proposes civic education open to ordinary working people, so they can argue about justice and the common good, and he says societies need sources of meaning that markets and technology cannot provide.
In their words« I'm for expanding education including civic education beyond the walls of privileged places »He wants civic education open to ordinary working people, so they can reason with fellow citizens about justice and the common good, and elites become less arrogant. watch
The arguments 7
The site's arguments they defend or criticize, and why. Click a title to see the full argument.
Lecture 1 opens with the choice of killing one person to save five, to show how moral intuitions clash. In Bangalore (2017) he asks why people who accept one death for five in the first case drop the same principle when it means pushing a man.
He presents Bentham's utilitarianism in Lectures 2-3, then raises objections to the greatest good for the greatest number and to measuring all values in money.
Lecture 4 presents Mill's claim that utilitarianism can tell higher from lower pleasures, and tests it with clips from Hamlet and The Simpsons.
Lectures 7-8 present Locke's natural rights to life, liberty and property, and the question of tacit consent.
Lecture 13 tests Kant's view that even white lies violate dignity, with the case of lying to a would-be killer.
Lectures 18-19 present Aristotle's justice as giving people their due according to the purpose of what is distributed. A review says Sandel builds his own view on this Aristotelian approach.
He argues that the veil of ignorance assumes unencumbered selves, people without the ties that shape them. In 2026 he says meritocracy rests on the idea that we are ultimately self-made and self-sufficient.
Allies and opponents
Alasdair MacIntyreClose
Listed with Michael Walzer, Charles Taylor and others among communitarian thinkers close to Sandel. He says he himself resisted the communitarian label (2023).
AristotleInfluence
His course ends with Aristotle on the good citizen and the purpose of a community.
Yuval Noah HarariClose
In their 2021 conversation he says there is no fundamental disagreement between them on the democratic alternative.
DDaron AcemogluClose
The MIT economist and Sandel agree on class-mixing institutions and on reviving democratic public discourse, while differing on how to ground individual rights.
John RawlsDisagrees
Sandel's main target in 1982; Rawls partly answered by calling his theory political. In 2026 he again rejects the public reason of Rawls and Habermas, which asks citizens to leave moral and spiritual convictions outside the public square.
Debates and big conversations
Signature ideas
The gifted character of life
Our talents and our children are not wholly our own making. Seeing them as gifts, he says, protects us from a Promethean drive to mastery and keeps us humble about success.
The moral limits of markets
Some goods lose their meaning when they are bought and sold. Asking what money should not buy is a moral question, not only an economic one.
The empty public square
Markets and technocratic talk seem neutral, he says, but they let us avoid debating the good life. The resulting moral void gets filled by strident nationalism or fundamentalism, so he asks for a public discourse open to moral and spiritual convictions, without expecting agreement.
Take the Compass: 5 minutes to find out which philosophers you are closest to.
All sources (41)
- Michael Sandel on what shouldn't be sold Philosophy Bites
- Communitarianism Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- Michael Sandel Wikipedia · 2026
- Justice with Michael Sandel (course page) Harvard (justiceharvard.org)
- Event summary: A debate on the ethics of genetic engineering Brookings Institution · 2004
- Michael Sandel on contributing to the common good MPR News · 2021
- The Case Against Perfection America Magazine (review by John F. Kavanaugh) · 2007
- The Kelvingrove Review (review of Justice) University of Glasgow *
- Who Merits to Govern Us? - lecture and panel (Netherlands) YouTube · 2023
- Who Merits to Govern Us? - the communitarian label YouTube · 2023
- Does the winner truly deserve their success? (Peking University) YouTube · 2025
- Insider Interview: Daron Acemoglu & Michael Sandel - class-mixing institutions YouTube · 2026
- Insider Interview: Daron Acemoglu & Michael Sandel - the moral void YouTube · 2026
- Why we shouldn't trust markets with our civic life YouTube · 2013
- AI Will Change What It Means To Be Human (Synapse 2024) YouTube · 2024
- Relating Philosophy to the World (Geneva Graduate Institute) YouTube · 2022
- Is Neymar worth more than a teacher? (interview) YouTube · 2019
- Is Killing Sometimes Justified? (Infosys, Bangalore) YouTube · 2017
- How to fight populism? The dignity of work (Vienna) YouTube · 2024
- Why 'Merit' Should be Rejected - lecture and debate with John Gray YouTube · 2026
- Davos 2017 - An Insight, An Idea with Michael Sandel YouTube · 2017
- Michael Sandel & Yuval Noah Harari in conversation YouTube · 2021
- Are There Things Money Shouldn't Be Able To Buy? (Oxford Union) YouTube · 2015
- Encountering China: Sandel on civic virtue and Aristotle (closing remarks) YouTube · 2018
- Encountering China: comparative philosophy as mutual learning YouTube · 2018
- Insider Interview: Acemoglu & Sandel - principles are not applied like policy YouTube · 2026
- Insider Interview: Acemoglu & Sandel - individual rights and community YouTube · 2026
- Why Merit Should be Rejected - against liberal public reason YouTube · 2026
- Why Merit Should be Rejected - meritocracy as self-made and self-sufficient YouTube · 2026
- Davos 2017 - what the elites missed YouTube · 2017
- Davos 2017 - technocratic language and the moral void YouTube · 2017
- Is Killing Sometimes Justified? - three ways of thinking about justice YouTube · 2017
- Is Killing Sometimes Justified? - Aristotle's justice and the flute YouTube · 2017
- Oxford Union - a politics of mutual respect YouTube · 2015
- Oxford Union - the fairness and corruption objections to markets YouTube · 2015
- Who Merits to Govern Us? - forums of deliberation YouTube · 2023
- AI Will Change What It Means To Be Human - technology and the Promethean aspiration YouTube · 2024
- Peking University - sources of meaning that markets and technology cannot provide YouTube · 2025
- Is Neymar worth more than a teacher? - philosophy in the public square YouTube · 2019
- The tyranny of merit (TED) YouTube · 2020
- Why 'Merit' Should be Rejected - lecture and debate with John Gray YouTube · 2026