IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uct/uconnp/2002-09.html

Rationality, Integrity, and Religious Behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Metin M. Cosgel

    (University of Connecticut)

  • Lanse Minkler

    (University of Connecticut)

Abstract

Religions typically prescribe their followers to display distinct behavior in consumption, production, and exchange. Well-known are the examples of Catholics not eating meat on Fridays during Lent, Hindus being vegetarian and Muslims and Jews avoiding pork, Muslims praying five times a day, and Jews and Christians observing the Sabbath. As a common theme in these examples, individuals are asked to commit to a behavioral pattern by consistently choosing one course of action over its alternatives and not to deviate from the pattern even as circumstances (e.g., prices, cost, endowment) change. Although some followers of a religion may not be observing a prescribed behavior strictly and there may be some nonreligious individuals who might also be displaying the same pattern, that all followers typically observe the same pattern but with varying levels of compliance nevertheless suggests a source of behavioral commitment emanating from religious belief. Economists typically approach this type of behavior in one of two general ways. The first is to view religious behavior as being less rational or outright irrational and thus outside of the domain of economics. An alternative approach that has recently grown in popularity has been to provide economic explanations of the nature and consequences of religious behavior. These explanations typically apply economic concepts and models by viewing believers as rational consumers and religious organizations as clubs or firms that collectively constitute a religious market. Supply side factors like differences in opportunity sets, demand side factors like distinct preferences of believers, or social factors like peer-pressure have been variously proposed to explain distinct behavior.1 We advocate a third general approach in this paper by borrowing insights from other disciplines, particularly from philosophy. Identifying the weaknesses of previous economic explanations, we offer an alternative explanation that relies on philosophical discussions on the concept of integrity. We use the notion of integrity defined as identity-conferring commitments to develop an economic analysis of choice. Focusing on religious behavior, we use the analysis to show the way the influence of commitment on behavior differs from those of preferences and social pressure. We also discuss extensions of the argument to related issues such as the multiplicity of the dimensions of identity.

Suggested Citation

  • Metin M. Cosgel & Lanse Minkler, 2002. "Rationality, Integrity, and Religious Behavior," Working papers 2002-09, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:uct:uconnp:2002-09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://media.economics.uconn.edu/working/2002-09.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Oliveira, Livio Luiz Soares de, 2013. "A teoria econômica da religião: aspectos gerais [Economics of religion: general aspects]," MPRA Paper 52012, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Metin M. Cosgel, 2008. "The Socio-economics of Consumption: Solutions to the Problems of Interest, Knowledge and Identity," Chapters, in: John B. Davis & Wilfred Dolfsma (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Social Economics, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Metin Cosgel, 2005. "Conversations between Anthropologists and Economists," Working papers 2005-29, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    4. Esa Mangeloja, 2004. "Economic Growth and Religious Production Efficiency," DEGIT Conference Papers c009_040, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uct:uconnp:2002-09. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Mark McConnel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deuctus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.