Is saving lives your task or God’s? Religiosity, belief in god, and moral judgment
Should a Catholic hospital abort a life-threatening pregnancy or let a pregnant woman die? Should a religious employer allow his employees access to contraceptives or break with healthcare legislation? People and organizations of faith often face moral decisions that have significant consequences. R...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press
2017-05-01
|
| Series: | Judgment and Decision Making |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S193029750000588X/type/journal_article |
| _version_ | 1827831595481956352 |
|---|---|
| author | Netta Barak-Corren Max H. Bazerman |
| author_facet | Netta Barak-Corren Max H. Bazerman |
| author_sort | Netta Barak-Corren |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Should a Catholic hospital abort a life-threatening pregnancy or let a pregnant woman die? Should a religious employer allow his employees access to contraceptives or break with healthcare legislation? People and organizations of faith often face moral decisions that have significant consequences. Research in psychology found that religion is typically associated with deontological judgment. Yet deontology consists of many principles, which may, at times, conflict. In three studies, we design a conflict between moral principles and find that the relationship between moral judgment and religiosity is more nuanced than currently assumed. Studies 1 and 2 show that, while religious U.S. Christians and Israeli Jews are more likely to form deontological judgments, they divide between the deontological principles of inaction and indirectness. Using textual analysis, we reveal that specific beliefs regarding divine responsibility and human responsibility distinguish inaction from indirectness deontologists. Study 3 exploits natural differences in religious saliency across days of the week to provide causal evidence that religion raises deontological tendencies on Sundays and selectively increases the appeal of inaction deontology for those who believe in an interventionist and responsible God. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T04:52:50Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-57120b74eeed42e4ac58abf3f726f11d |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1930-2975 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-12T04:52:50Z |
| publishDate | 2017-05-01 |
| publisher | Cambridge University Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Judgment and Decision Making |
| spelling | doaj.art-57120b74eeed42e4ac58abf3f726f11d2023-09-03T09:20:20ZengCambridge University PressJudgment and Decision Making1930-29752017-05-011228029610.1017/S193029750000588XIs saving lives your task or God’s? Religiosity, belief in god, and moral judgmentNetta Barak-Corren0Max H. Bazerman1Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Faculty of Law, Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem 9190501 Israel.,Harvard University, Harvard Business School, Soldiers Field Road, Boston, MA 02163 USAShould a Catholic hospital abort a life-threatening pregnancy or let a pregnant woman die? Should a religious employer allow his employees access to contraceptives or break with healthcare legislation? People and organizations of faith often face moral decisions that have significant consequences. Research in psychology found that religion is typically associated with deontological judgment. Yet deontology consists of many principles, which may, at times, conflict. In three studies, we design a conflict between moral principles and find that the relationship between moral judgment and religiosity is more nuanced than currently assumed. Studies 1 and 2 show that, while religious U.S. Christians and Israeli Jews are more likely to form deontological judgments, they divide between the deontological principles of inaction and indirectness. Using textual analysis, we reveal that specific beliefs regarding divine responsibility and human responsibility distinguish inaction from indirectness deontologists. Study 3 exploits natural differences in religious saliency across days of the week to provide causal evidence that religion raises deontological tendencies on Sundays and selectively increases the appeal of inaction deontology for those who believe in an interventionist and responsible God.https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S193029750000588X/type/journal_articlereligionnormative conflictinactionindirectnessdeontologyutilitarianismSunday effect |
| spellingShingle | Netta Barak-Corren Max H. Bazerman Is saving lives your task or God’s? Religiosity, belief in god, and moral judgment Judgment and Decision Making religion normative conflict inaction indirectness deontology utilitarianism Sunday effect |
| title | Is saving lives your task or God’s? Religiosity, belief in god, and moral judgment |
| title_full | Is saving lives your task or God’s? Religiosity, belief in god, and moral judgment |
| title_fullStr | Is saving lives your task or God’s? Religiosity, belief in god, and moral judgment |
| title_full_unstemmed | Is saving lives your task or God’s? Religiosity, belief in god, and moral judgment |
| title_short | Is saving lives your task or God’s? Religiosity, belief in god, and moral judgment |
| title_sort | is saving lives your task or god s religiosity belief in god and moral judgment |
| topic | religion normative conflict inaction indirectness deontology utilitarianism Sunday effect |
| url | https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S193029750000588X/type/journal_article |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT nettabarakcorren issavinglivesyourtaskorgodsreligiositybeliefingodandmoraljudgment AT maxhbazerman issavinglivesyourtaskorgodsreligiositybeliefingodandmoraljudgment |