Markets and Morality: Complements or Substitutes?

Storr and Choi's answer is a resounding no: markets do not corrupt our morals. To the contrary, markets have a symbiotic relationship with morality. Markets need morality to survive and thrive, and at the same time, markets make us more moral. The authors support this claim with empirical and theoretical evidence. Despite my affinity to their positions, and my agreement that markets need morality to function, given my work on Adam Smith, I fear they may have posed the question in a misleading way. This may compromise their answer. They ask: do markets corrupt our morals? But to whom do they refer? Whose is 'our' in this inquiry? Twenty-first-century intellectuals of western countries? All of humanity? Could 'our' apply to medieval monks? Or to Spartan warriors?