Bodies For Sale

Week of: 
Sunday, December 7, 2008
What is it: 

I can sell my house, the things I make, and the services I provide.  So why can't I sell one of my kidneys?  What is the philosophical basis for the taboo against selling parts of our bodies?  There is an (illegal) market in body parts; shouldn't we trust the wisdom of the market and make it legitimate?  Or would doing so undermine the very dignity of persons and human life?  Ken and John dissect the issues with Stanford Philosopher Debra Satz, author of Why Some Things Should Not Be for Sale: On The Limits of Markets.

Listening Notes: 

John and Ken start out by listing some dizzying statistics – in 2006, 6000 people in the US died awaiting organ transplant and only about half of those who could donate, did.  They review a brief list of reasons for and against selling organs: aiding the financially-needy (who are willing to sell organs for money) and the organ-needy one the one hand, violating donor’s personhood and exploiting the poor on the other.

Debra Satz joins Ken and John, and they begin their conversation by considering why the organ market should be run by anything other than principles of efficiency. Are those considerations so strong as to suggest that there should not be a market at all? While emphasizing the moral reasons against having an organ market, Debra notes that there is not much reliable data on how organ markets actually work in the real world, since they have almost never been legalized.

Ken and John then ask Debra about some of apparent inconsistencies of outlawing an organ market. If people may donate blood, then why not organs? Given that there are many individual cases in which organ donation is noble, why does it become smarmy when the market gets involved? Debra recaps some of the best arguments for an organ market, but also draws some bottom lines: in particular, the percentage of donors who regretted selling their organs, after the fact, when there was a legalized organ market in India.

John, Ken, and Debra end by exploring  what the best possible version of an organ market could be, if there was such a market. In the US, individuals must ‘opt-in’ to have their organs donated upon their death; in Europe, individuals must opt-out. Why shouldn’t we have the latter? Debra suggests an in-kind futures market, whereby individuals or their families are paid by future in-kind donations, rather than monetarily. Ken and John discuss a single-buyer and distributor system. They end by emphasizing the complexity – and intrigue – of the problem.

  • Roving Philosophical Reporter (seek to 5:50): Julie Napolin interviews David Magnus, director of Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, who talks to her about the dynamics of the organ donation game. He discusses the rules for solicitation, directed donation, and finding real friends.
  • 60-second Philosopher (seek to 49:20): Ian Schoales uncovers frightening – but mostly false – stories about organ scandals and thefts.

Debra Satz, Marta Sutton Weeks Professor of Ethics in Society, Stanford University

Related Resources: 

Online Resources


Get Philosophy Talk


Sunday at 10am, PST, KALW, 91.7 FM, Local Public Radio, San Francisco


Individual Downloads  via CdBaby or Itunes.  Multipacks and The Complete Philosophy Talk via Iamplify

John Perry and Ken Taylor

Continue the Conversation

Sidebar Menu

Upcoming Shows

  • August 31 : Is Intuition a Guide to Truth?
    Turns out that Galileo was right and Aristotle was wrong: in a vacuum, a feather and a bowling ball will fall from a tall building at exactly the...
  • September 7 : Neuroscience and the Law
    Recent advances in neuroscience have revealed that certain neurological disorders, like a brain tumor, can cause an otherwise normal person to...
  • September 14 : Babies and the Birth of Morality
    Doing the right thing is often an extremely difficult task. Yet psychological research indicates that infants as young as 21 months old have a crude...
  • September 21 : Machiavelli
    Niccolò Machiavelli is best known for arguing that people in power should use deception, force, and manipulation if those tactics are necessary to...
  • September 28 : Second-Guessing Ourselves
    We like to think of ourselves as self-aware, reflective beings, but psychological studies demonstrate that we’re usually overconfident in the...

Support Philosophy Talk


Philosophy Talk relies on the support of listeners like you to stay on the air and online. Any contribution, large or small, helps us produce intelligent, reflective radio that questions everything, including our most deeply-held beliefs about science, morality, culture, and the human condition. Make your tax-deductible contribution now through Stanford University's secure online donation page. Thank you for your support, and thank you for thinking!