Michael Sandel - Are There Things Money Shouldn't Be Able To Buy?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 ноя 2024
- SUBSCRIBE for more speakers ► is.gd/OxfordUnion
Oxford Union on Facebook: / theoxfordunion
Oxford Union on Twitter: @OxfordUnion
Website: www.oxford-unio...
Michael J. Sandel is an American political philosopher and a professor at Harvard University. He is best known for the Harvard course "Justice", which is available to view online, and for his critique of John Rawls' A Theory of Justice in his first book, Liberalism and the Limits of Justice (1982). He was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2002.
ABOUT THE OXFORD UNION SOCIETY: The Union is the world's most prestigious debating society, with an unparalleled reputation for bringing international guests and speakers to Oxford. It has been established for 189 years, aiming to promote debate and discussion not just in Oxford University, but across the globe.
![Stromae, Pomme - “Ma Meilleure Ennemie” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Visualizer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1F3OGIFnW1k/mqdefault.jpg)
Perhaps one of the best public speakers in the world, scores high on both presentation and content! 10/10 would recommend
no shit Sherlock!
Certainly lucky to have access to these lectures and discussions.
Suggest some more speakers like that....
I@@ducman1611
When you say that those Oxford students seem immature and unknowledgeable in comparison with the Harvard students in 2009, you forget that the Harvard students were actually studying this subject and were required to read the works of Kant and other numerous handouts, whereas the Oxford Union is simply a debating society and thus the audience there is from different academic backgrounds, many of which have little (if at all) to do with ethics
They all take philosophy courses per req. they should have all already read many of these works.
@@lseul8812 they don’t all take philosophy courses, what are you talking about?
The Harvard course also had what sounded like an online discussion board and he mentioned students' arguments from it. They were prepared for debate in several ways.
i put these lectures on loudly while i'm cleaning and i get lost in the stories and arguments, thanks for providing a little escape.
I am doing just the same right now
Me too
Actually what I’m doing now XD
Mr Sandel, you remind me of my father. Thank you for the things I've learned from you. Thank you for the thoughts. Thank you for being a Teacher!
I love Micheal Sandal, such a phenomal bloke. I've learnt alot from him, towards my own life.
"..overcome the bad habit of outsourcing our moral judgements to markets.."
1:06:46- and to not say, "I respect all ideas" as a cop out.
His lectures on Justice, populism, democracies, what money can’t buy & others are awesome. I enjoy listening to his every talk 👌
I have seen justice can you provide link of populism and democracy
I love how about 5 minutes in, he just switches to "professor mode" and just goes with the discussion.
I sincerely appreciate that he recognized that there may be a language barrier at 27:00 and adjusted to keep the flow of the lecture.
Yeah seriously, he didn't bother to explain what a hedge fund manager was he just gave a more generic and precise example.
As far as paying kids to read, I think the argument Josh made is very valid. It's like what happened with high-stakes testing in the 2000s. Teachers actually gave their students the answers to these tests so that they wouldn't be at risk of losing their jobs. Teachers started teaching kids how to pass the test and as a result the kids weren't learning any critical thinking skills and would solve problems and answer questions more like a computer than a human being. Incentivizing learning didn't help at all, and paying kids to read books won't help either. They won't become more thoughtful, careful readers, they'll just be chugging through them to earn those two dollars.
Sandel for president !
Maltese Falcon I'd vote for him!
It’s worth thinking about the so-called market value for our labor and the extent to which contracting our labor is coerced by social inequities or whether the valuation of our labor is determined by free and open market forces or by a market constrained by market controlling corporations. The thought experiment brings the economic justice of wage valuations to light. At the very least, we ought to disabuse ourselves of the naive belief that marketplaces are free and open or inherently equitable. All economies are political economies and, as such, respond best to political forces that protect the rights and interests of the least advantaged. Labor Unions and governments (labor law / civil rights law / commerce law) are institutions can serve to protect and promote the rights and interests of wage earners. No simple solutions to be had to be sure. Naively holding onto a faith in “free and open” markets hardly works. The dialogue led by Sandel at least sets the table and casts aside naive and magical thinking about how market economies work.
Plato dancing in his graves... Philosopher Kings
I wishhhhh
Tax the robots!
It's very frustating to be able to see this socratic type of class and not be able to participate. Awesome!
take his justice class online
This is not a normal lecture
@@KheraShanu are you talking like a MOOC course? Or actually enroll at Harvard and take his class online?
listening to some of these oxford students make not-too-great arguments was so good for my self-esteem
You might also be interested to hear that even if some of them are the brightest people in the country, they're not *all* of the time, in *all* situations. It's just the media's habit to create an image of them as being something greater than human.
😂 😂 😂
Hey, don't rush to jump into conclusions, they may not be the best representatives of Oxford. If you want to check what bright minds they could cultivate, just look at the list of Oxford alumni. And Michael Sandel is on of them by the way.
Ego, you mean.
@@guillermoruiz9739 yep
This is a very good topic which needs to be explored further. Thanks to Professor Michael Sandel. My take is, there should always be things that money should not be able to buy.
Absolutely, there are definitely things money shouldn't be able to buy. Qualities like love, respect, and genuine friendship can't be purchased. Additionally, concepts such as happiness and fulfillment often stem from experiences and relationships rather than financial wealth. It's important to recognize that while money can provide comfort and access to resources, the most valuable things in life, such as integrity, trust, and compassion, are earned through actions and character, not transactions.Are There Things Money Shouldn't Be Able To Buy?
Most insightful student comment is at 27:02 -- "you have to make another argument about how selling a kidney or sex is essentially different from selling your intelligence" -- effectively generalizing the terms of the debate from prostitution and kidneys to all work, and the degree to which we instrumentalize ourselves in everyday life.
I think it is wrong to generalize all work as the same. Intelectuals sell their intelectual work, not them selfes. House builders build houses, so “sells” the building, not them selfes. They are using their knowledge or physical strengh to create someting, that is not them selfes. Prostitution does not create any product. So it is selling your own body, while in other examples - it is about selling your own work. I think it is a big difference in this and saying “all work is the same” would be oversiplyfing the problem.
Prostitutes don’t just sell access to their vagina. Have you ever had sex with a woman that just lies there? Highly paid prostitutes are probably very skilled at having sex and are therefore selling their skill not their body.
@@linas_i good point
Dignity..courage, grace can never be bought with money.... Thank you professor Sandel for your wonderful lectures that you bless us with freely..
Wow! I love watching Prof. Sandel's teaching techniques. As a parent who successfully reared a child with ADHD, paying him for grades was the initial incentive that got him hooked on reading and learning, as school work was very frustrating for him. Then, the intrinsic value of learning took over. My son then graduated from Harvard Law. For low income children who face deprivation and lack, they need the tangible reward of seeing the results of their efforts. For my child, I made a graduated scale (okay the scale was long ago): $5 for the first A, $6 each for two A's, etc, so that all A's ended up being worth $10 each. It was highly motivational. I reasoned that when I work, I get a financial reward even though my work has other great values and contributions. For young children, doing school work is their job. We put monetary values on everything in life. If you are hit by a drunk driver and left maimed or paraplegic, no amount of money can pay you for the loss of your limbs, but putting a dollar compensatory value on it is all we can do.
I am speechless with his wisdom. This is an amazing lecture.
👽♥️♥️♥️
I loooove how the professor paraphrases the students' responses to clarify model language, terminology and communication. Excellent!!
Our body is some sort of gift to keep it . Where as our knowledge is acquired , gained from society or institutions. Selling our knowledge can’t be the same as selling our body.
his book: 'moral limit of markets' was my top 5 favourite book ive ever read...and i read a lot of books. i even have a library room in my own house!
His lectures are really so engaging and stimulating
So good to hear these innocent students speak without understanding the context of the debate in the wider world
He’s a rockstar in my eyes. I appreciate him so much.
This was a really nice, engaging, informative lecture. I'm happy I have the opportunity to watch it.
it is amazing to see how these philosophical questions impacts big issues in society.
The answer is Socrates my human fallow.... It's because of Socrates
How peacefully he discussing with students. Awesome!
Michael Sandel ought to moderate political debates in the presidential elections.
Maybe the reason it could be considered "wrong" to sell our organs or bodies for sex would be that typically when we buy something we are using it as a tool and taking ownership over it. The object or the thing that is being bought automatically has less value than the buyer because the buyer is able to purchase it and own it. So in light of prostitution if you sell you're body you're automatically becoming less than the person who is buying your services. So even if the society was equal, and someone wasn't forced whether by violence or financial need, they'd still be valuing themselves as less than another.
Reggie W finally, some one got the underlying message of the lecture
Fundamentally I agree with your reasoning. However, we buy more than goods, we also buy services like electritians, masseuse, psychiatrists without thinking that any of them are "lower" than us. so I think the way we think of prostitution has more to do with social construct than probably the service itself.
Reggie W the fundamental question is morals. The essence of being human. What is our core values - does the means matter just as much as the end? Does the purpose of production and exchange matter? It goes to a deeper philosophical question of existence and what life means to all of us, whether you have a higher purpose in life - because if you don't then it doesn't matter.
Someone is selling what they don’t need in exchange for something they do need. That is the long and the short of it. If someone does not have any other options than you are providing something they “need”.
Thanks MR Sandel very very much for these 69 great minutes, thanks for the ideas the presentation the way you managed the participants. I'm so grateful for watching your lectures.
Though it's so sad to watch such an impressive both lecture and debate and not be able to practice the idea of participating in a moral and human society.
I'm writing this comment from Egypt where the concept of ethics and moral are almost vanishing, It's sad and frustrating that we would have been able to value our moral codes and live with our ethics comfortably and freely if only one wasn't born in such a doomed spot and time.
Listening to your lectures have enriched my life. Thank you.
I wish I could have participated in this. I'd have so many questions and answers in my want to learn. Oh well, thank you for this lecture!
You never can buy authenticity in relations. That is if you base only such relations by emotions. Emotions that fluctuates, emotions that judges anything that only goes along with it.(To be continued)
I really like those kind of debates those students are lucky to have you around them
He has same wisdom like my father , very brilliant man. My father is full of knowledge
This man is a living treasure
Exactly... Treasure
Really feel for the guy raising his hand at 51:14 . Captures exactly how I feel at busy pubs.
+utlcutl exactly why you shouldn't waste time in colleges, because they make you go to these stupid ass lectures that is the core of their teachings, and even the frontrunner of discussion as shown here still fucking disregard, due to the constraints of big classroom which is a result of the prestige of colleges vs just talking to a random people in a pub who may well have much better idea about whatever this guy has to say, especially scaling with the more famous you are as a lecturer, now that millions of people know what he's mostly all about
@@lyrilljackson wtf happened to you? You seem traumatized
@@ndndndnnduwjqams wow nice necro bump there son
@@lyrilljackson hahaha true. How are you nowadays?
@@ndndndnnduwjqams how are you?
Noam Chomsky talks about this. How Neoliberalism has led to the utilitarian view of all things - without truly acknowledging and appreciating the intrinsic value of all living things. Neoliberalism leads to the privatization of what were once known as public goods, and turning everything into a commodity. In other words, putting a price on everything, based on a cost-benefit analysis. This is only looking at the utility of an object without truly understanding the consequences of potentially depleting or abusing a resource that we all commonly depend on. For example, when it comes to environmental problems - capitalists and the ownership-class would like to avoid stringent regulations administered by various agencies. They believe this will inhibit the free-market, and such an oversight is unnecessary, especially when it comes to supply a specific need. Putting a price on everything leads to the mental-framework of just looking at the costs of utility. You cannot put a cost in the biospherical integrity of the entire planet with finite resources. You cannot put a cost on a human-life when it comes to military conscription or giving a child up for adoption. The privatization and commodification of markets, has led to a very dichotomous view of what the cost to human life are. Neoliberal ideas have led to the socioeconomic disparity of differing classes, de-regulation of industries, and environmental costs to our entire biosphere. Capitalists are in pursuit of constantly seeking to expand the market and commoditizing everything. Putting a price on everything, for the sake of increasing their sphere of influence, for the sole purpose of primitive accumulation and profit maximization. In consequence, we see very depersonalized system that dehumanizes individuals. The false tautology of saying that the market determines allocates and distributes wealth and income in a neutral, impersonal, and fair way is the biggest lie. Market rules are organized, stipulated, and enforced by our legislature, administrative agencies, and courts - they ultimately determine what can be privately owned, what degree of market power is permissible, what types of contracts can exist between employer and laborer, and what is enforced in the free-market. Unfortunately, neoliberal ideas have proliferated, and espoused this false tautology that we live in a meritocracy - and that there must be a price on everything. They have abrogated and rescinded means of enacting more public good programs and safety-nets, and curtailed any efforts of correcting market deficiencies created by unfettered capitalism. Indeed.
If money is the secret to motivation, then the rich should be dancing in the street. But only poor kids do that.
the rich are dancing in the street, it's just that it's their own personal street they're dancing in
@@MrPedala94 Maybe they are but so is the poor. I guess its just a further proof of money, happiness and motivation not walking hand in hand.
they don't dance in the streets they dance in clubs
OMG OxfordUnion keep these types of discussions and these guest lecturers and these types of videos coming. #Knowledgeporn
Thank you Michael sanders.
Another reason markets are brought up often in political discourse is because politics and economics are almost inseperable. Because it has proven that countries with the largest markets wield the highest powers especially financially. Money makes the world go round. If we can't all come to a conclusion on what the acceptable values are and how the world is run, the next best thing is to control money. We don't all have the same values, sadly so. Even good values are unfortunately disregarded by some. Having money= having power= control. Most would rather just do what brings most money or makes their markets boom most at the expense of values. Again, because we don't all have same values. I believe in world peace, but does the country next to me believe so??? If we don't have the finacial resources to defend ourselves or even prevent ourselves from being trodden upon in any way.
Markets might be a way to escape normative arguments and all but I can see why it is the core determinant for decision making.
Dude this guy is a legend
The artful way Sandel gets her back on topic at 28:00 is wonderful - she has a point, but it's not part of the discussion - he doesn't even comment on it. A man of focus!
dumb Chinese student is what she is
Anyone else think he looks like Tywin Lannister?
hhaah YASSS
chataolauj I think he looks like Mr. Drummond.
Vladimir Putin.
Thank you!!
chata
insightful conversation with Professor Sandel
From an accounting perspective, there are intangible assets, which are hard to value with money
I have seen his Harvard lectures and student participated so brilliantly and gave very rational and logical reasons. Whereas here students aren’t able to provide any sound objection to the question.
Those students were philosophy students while these are not, so that's probably why.
Sa palagay ko mas mabuting we should use our own body parts to live and let live, and even to love , to enjoy life rather than fighting even though it's individual choice for mutual love but not mutual fighting because we don't want bad result that could happen maybe even to cause use of force.
One must do things for the soul, and not let it be lost in your daily transactions. One must cultivate a pure soul, things of materials in nature will pass like everything else, you must answer for a higher calling, which I believe is self sacrifice.
A great example of the Swiss character. Can see now why allocating monetary units in schools for extra responsibility led to a separation into leaders who get the monetary reimbursement and the disengagement of those being led. Collective co-construction was diminished and leaders ended up close to burnout. Market incentives of money lessen the communal aspect of a school community amongst professional colleagues.
Thank you Dr. Sandel.
Thank You . I am so grateful to you!!
I have seen his lecture they r very intellectual...this man is very smart...I'm from India
Great talk, but a little ironic that this video has about 20 ads built in.
Ads? What ads?
It's truly sad that we lost the language to discuss sanctity of a life. I would say the objections to killing the rhino or selling oneself I to slavery etc... is what kind of person does the rhino killer or slave owner have to be to engage in this behavior? Are they a person you would want to be a friend of, spouse of, would a country full of those people be good trading partners or allies in a war? Would you be ok with your standard of living being dependent on slave labor?
The rebuttal would be we can ritualize the attonement for these sins as necessary evils by having a sort of modern scapegoating event. We may offer up to the gods a goat in recognition that what we are doing is reprehensible but it is necessary for our existence in this case we could point to animal medical testing as a necessary evil. This ritualized event of forgiveness would counteract the character degradation such evil acts cause by recognizing that they are evil and permissible only to the extent that we have no other option but preventing further slide down this slippery slope.
Ultimately whichever side you land on is subjective and neither opinion is correct or incorrect. I don't have an answer to this one but I at least understand the sides of the discussion.
There is no right or wrong...but a question of morality...that diffrences throu out time..(.for example middle ages ..now...the future??)..
I would like to offer Mr. Sandel a Mastercard.
Aside from Josh's argument from the last case, majority of the students, if not all, didn't really think out their argument and have sound reasons for their argument. The first two cases were challenging though, but these are supposed to be Oxford students.
completely agree. this is disappointing. the reasons and arguments from the students were weak.
So what if they're oxford students? They could be studying say chemical engineering and never thought of these questions before and just came to hear/participate in the discussion in real time
I have an idea: let a whole group of Texas game hunters bid for the privilege of hunting each other on an unpopulated Pacific island, and use that money to protect the black rhino. It's a two-pronged approach; you increase the rhino population while reducing the game hunter population, and no rhinos are harmed in the process.
Almost clever.
There are too many battle royale games as it is. One was too many.
They should let people engage in any agreement as they do choose so long as there is proper oversight. Would be thrilling to be in that situation.
51:32 I feel bad for the guy raising his hand all this time and not getting even one chance to speak 😔
Depending who you are and how you’ll sell, something instead
More people need to watch this.
Thanks for this amazing lecture again )) Lot of love from Namibia
yes , there are , & I shall remember you forever.
We do it all the time, we send our kids through education to see what it is they may like doing with their lives. They may not like many many classes but they still will learn and something might spark their imagination.
Brilliant, very good discussion here
a view from phenomenology could help. To distinct the esencial from the accidental, what's accidental can be bought , what is escential can not
I am an information technology person at York university in Toronto.
he is like giving a lecture in the class
Oxford university's student response totally different from the Harvard university's student
'Education' is one thing that should not be purchasable with money/power; because that is the only key differentiator in the long run. It is the 'ideas' that truly govern nor the money neither the power. When quality education is accessible to the wealthy and powerful(as it is the case at present) , only privileged class governs the world(which has been the case so far).
Lecturing younger ones brings out the best in Michael - paying for certain things does diminish its value - I’ll seconds that -
Buying and selling of kidneys - I’m not for it -
It’s risky “ if you get dodgy kidneys “ it can be detrimental to health n life -does the kidney have a cell memory - you’d take on some characteristics / tastes of that doner-
Awesome session. Lol that guy in grey t-shirt has his hand raised Mr. Sandel !!!
@38:28- this is easily countered with a minimum bid which is the normal practice in auction
Its a great thing there arent many adds in this video. Btw I think the truth shouldnt be sold for money.
This really is an exciting debate. While Sandel looks pretty tired by the end.
Jet lag perhaps
frankly, you learn to learn, do the work, kids are cheap, two bucks a book is very good value!
I would say " Dear Lisa and Michael, today is your wedding day, and I have found this speech online and I think it is what I think about you guy. I am going to read this to you "
Putting that way would be hillarious LMFAO
To answer the question of selling human organs, I would say to consider the idea of what makes us human. A human body consists of two legs, two hands, two eyes and so on. Although I will be able to survive if I sell one of these organs, I will not be able to function 100% as I would do with that organ. Can anybody imagine a 3 legged tiger?
Interesting discussions, the same moral discussion are also being raised in psychology. However well intentioned, Money will always be used to corrupt others, even those with strong ethics and principles, especially when they have things in their past they are ashamed of or will effect their reputation or position of power. An those who live in poverty will always be exploited by wealthy powerful people. Thank you, Peace
People in poverty are not exploited through capitalism. They trade willingly. Without capitol the services will become a matter of privilege which will be distributed at the discretion of politicians. That is when the true exploitation begins.
@@benjaminr8961 i know you comment is 8 months old, but i cant believe you just watch the entire video and still come up with something like this.
@@gonx9906 Well maybe I came into watching this video with more knowledge.
Allowing political positions to leverage great amounts of power incentivizes bad people to seek those positions. The result is always rampant corruption. Places like Iran, Saudi Arabia, China, and Russia where political elites wield all of the power politicians can do whatever they want.
@@benjaminr8961 "with more knowledge" are you kidding me?? he is a harvard professor, those are oxford students, he cited two cientific research and you have more knowledge?? all you are doing is vomiting the libertarian speech over and over again, grow a brain pls and learn to think for yourself.
@@gonx9906 I was saying I have more knowledge than you.
Also being a professor docent mean you are well informed and "scientific research" is an empty and meaningless term because the studies are only as good as their methodology.
On top of this all this is a ethical lecture which means someone cannot just learn it. Ethics are not clearly objective easily verifiable things. That is why two people can be "experts" and totally disagree with each other.
Just to emphasize this point. Someone having a well respected position or a fancy degree does not mean they are smart. Academia now days is more about trudging through endless paper work than being intelligent.
Marx was an "expert", eugenic scientist were "experts", the federal reserve board who caused the great depression were "experts".
Citing someone's position as a reason for them being right is called an "appeal to authority" which is a logical fallacy.
Money has its role, but it is not an end in itself and that should be taught to children. As a parent or a teacher you have a responsibility to teach the children a wide range of valuable things in life, be those material, or immaterial. First of all, you have to teach them that the most important things in life are things that are not material, like love, affection, friendship, kindness and so on. That should be the starting point for rewarding them. But than you should also teach them that material things also can bring a certain benefit, comfort and joy in their lives, so rewarding them with an ice cream, a week-end trip or a theatre ticket is also desirable. Finally, as they reach a certain maturity, rewarding them with pocket money sometime is actually beneficial. They should be prepared sooner or later how to spend, save, or even invest money. That said, I would only reward them with money on an occasional and unpredictable basis, and only after the reading is done, just to prevent them form the fallacy that money is the end goal.
The question about the Rhino is really easy to answer if you are a consequentialist. :)
Can't Oxford budget 100$ for a low-end audio tech to set up the mics and man the sound board?
Such great content has rarely been so annoying to listen to... I'm here perched on the end of my chair! Somebody honour Pr Sandel with some well-earned respect-monies please.
Even if you pay someone to read more books, it still will open their minds
I would like to argue on the point of paying children that it could function just like a scholarship does. Where aren't these kids paid for their high school (or secondary school) grades to attend more school, depending on how well they do? Furthermore, some low income children once they reach a certain age are forced to work to earn money for themselves and their family. If they were paid to go to school, perhaps they could be in competition with other students who are able to dedicate themselves fully to studying.
Resoundingly yes. Magic is one of those things.
Best argument is at 41:00 , my opinion
Excellent lecture!!
Friend cant buy by money,but it's easily lost.
So does this mean that Oxford or Harvard charging high tuition fees actually change the value of the provision of higher education? Does this mean that higher eduaction should be free or commodified?
I don't think that's the logic.
My favorite MP is the honorable Tin Peh Ling serving Grab in a prominent high position
Хотел в Италию поехать либо в Щвейцарию на магистратуру
An economist would despise him
these kids didnt come to the talk prepared. sandel had to constantly push them to structure and identify their core reasons behind why they thought the way they do and they clearly couldnt do it. you can sense sandel's frustration.
Economy is stupid ( tmtc les bails)
Champion 😂
lo ibrahima je m'attendais pas a un francais ici XD
C'est terrible, ils sont partout ... ;)
Quand à savoir si l'on peut ou pas vendre ses organes, je pense que la question tient plus de la morale que d'une politique d'offre ou de demande, du coup:
Utilitarisme vs Déontologie: ruclips.net/video/AZBDMN5wZ-8/видео.html
Relativisme vs Réalisme: ruclips.net/video/7KmAKVaO-Xc/видео.html
C'est pas piqué des hannetons, et ça permet de comprendre la position de certains acteurs du marché, quelque peu monstrueux...
short answer: yes
Because can not buy it because it's more expensive than money and Gold it's divinely sacred and divinely priceless 🕋🌅🌅🌟🌄✨
Yes - my Adam "The Priest" Smith is here and told me to write this.
question about the jail cell upgrade is an interesting one to me. my parents work in a jail, one as an inmate counselor and one as the Chaplain. i've always thought that NO, if you're in jail you should NOT be able to live in a more comfortable life just because you have the desire AND ABILITY to do so. however... i now wonder what the extra money goes towards. for the most part, that money will be direct surplus - maybe some of it goes directly back to the inmate in terms of extra items or something, but once the cells are built, that money is just there. so the question to me is, what do they use it for? does it help the general situation in the county? other inmates who can't afford basics? to me, if the money goes to a good moral cause, i might support it ONLY UNDER THE CONDITION that this option was NOT available to those whose crimes were things like violent felony, murder, rape, kidnapping, that kind of thing. if you're there for a low-level offense and you didn't hurt someone, then i could get on board with that.
Functionalism when afforded as a consideration, would throw a spanner in the works