In this TED Talk, Michael Sandel says that we are making it harder to get anything productive out of the democratic process when we leave our  moral convictions at the door. He starts the talk by asking a question. If everyone in the crowd is given a flute, who should get the best flutes? Someone in the audience had said the best flutes should be given to the best flute players because it would be better for everyone as a whole. Aristotle would’ve argued that the best flutes should be given to the best flute players because flutes were made to recognize those who have the best flute playing ability.

To make his point even clearer, he brings up a supreme court case between the PGA (Professional Golf Association) and a disabled man named Casey Martin. The man who can walk properly had requested to use a cart so that he may be able to get around. The PGA

said no because they felt that it would give him an unfair advantage. Under state law, accommodations need to be made as long as the accommodation does not change the essential nature of the activity. When asked by Michael, one audience member said that walking was part of the game. Another member, who coincidentally played golf, said that walking isn’t part of it. The Supreme Court had taken the Martin’s side. Scalia had written the dissenting opinion to say that the point of the game is simply amusement. Equality is not part of it. If it had been, everyone should’ve just been given a cart.

Michael says we need to know where people are coming from when they decide on issues. We need to know what values of something a person is willing to uphold. He brings in the contemporary issue of same-sex marriage where some people value marriage’s use of procreation and others value its meaning of commitment. By knowing what people uphold morally, we can have respect for our opponents’ opinions and have a better discussion towards the improvement of the country.