天主教徒、新教徒和穆斯林:相似的工作伦理,不同的社会和政治伦理

IF 2.8 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Miguel Abellán
{"title":"天主教徒、新教徒和穆斯林:相似的工作伦理,不同的社会和政治伦理","authors":"Miguel Abellán","doi":"10.1016/j.jce.2023.02.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper employs data from the World Values Survey (1995–2020) and the European Values Study (1999–2020) to test three hypotheses on attitudinal differences between Catholics, Protestants and Muslims: (1) the <em>work ethic hypothesis,</em> which covers attitudes towards work and some fundamental characteristics of the market economy; (2) the <em>social ethic hypothesis</em>, which concerns interpersonal trust, ethical standards and attitudes towards gender equality; (3) the <em>political ethic hypothesis</em>, which involves attitudes towards democracy and political violence, institutional trust and preferences for government-organized redistribution. The empirical analysis provides very little support for the <em>work ethic hypothesis</em> but solid support for the <em>social</em> and <em>political ethic hypothesis</em>. Although the results should be ultimately interpreted as partial correlations, they support the following argument. Market forces and the rise of post-materialist values may have dissolved the original role of a work ethic rooted in religion (especially in the Catholic and Protestant world). Yet, the socio-political ethic associated with Catholicism, Protestantism and Islam continues to manifest itself in attitudinal differences concerning interpersonal trust, ethical standards and gender equality, and in political preferences. A complementary analysis of regions with a historically strong influence of Catholicism, Protestantism and Islam supports this argument and suggests that the current attitudinal differences between the three religions are more related to their cultural and historical legacy than to current personal commitment to their specific doctrines.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48183,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Comparative Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Catholics, Protestants and Muslims: Similar work ethics, different social and political ethics\",\"authors\":\"Miguel Abellán\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jce.2023.02.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper employs data from the World Values Survey (1995–2020) and the European Values Study (1999–2020) to test three hypotheses on attitudinal differences between Catholics, Protestants and Muslims: (1) the <em>work ethic hypothesis,</em> which covers attitudes towards work and some fundamental characteristics of the market economy; (2) the <em>social ethic hypothesis</em>, which concerns interpersonal trust, ethical standards and attitudes towards gender equality; (3) the <em>political ethic hypothesis</em>, which involves attitudes towards democracy and political violence, institutional trust and preferences for government-organized redistribution. The empirical analysis provides very little support for the <em>work ethic hypothesis</em> but solid support for the <em>social</em> and <em>political ethic hypothesis</em>. Although the results should be ultimately interpreted as partial correlations, they support the following argument. Market forces and the rise of post-materialist values may have dissolved the original role of a work ethic rooted in religion (especially in the Catholic and Protestant world). Yet, the socio-political ethic associated with Catholicism, Protestantism and Islam continues to manifest itself in attitudinal differences concerning interpersonal trust, ethical standards and gender equality, and in political preferences. A complementary analysis of regions with a historically strong influence of Catholicism, Protestantism and Islam supports this argument and suggests that the current attitudinal differences between the three religions are more related to their cultural and historical legacy than to current personal commitment to their specific doctrines.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48183,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Comparative Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Comparative Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147596723000185\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Comparative Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147596723000185","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文采用世界价值观调查(1995-2020)和欧洲价值观研究(1999-2000)的数据,检验了天主教徒、新教徒和穆斯林之间态度差异的三个假设:(1)职业道德假设,涵盖了对工作的态度和市场经济的一些基本特征;(2) 社会伦理假设,涉及人际信任、伦理标准和对性别平等的态度;(3) 政治伦理假说,涉及对民主和政治暴力的态度、制度信任和对政府组织再分配的偏好。实证分析对工作伦理假说的支持很少,但对社会和政治伦理假说的支撑却是坚实的。尽管这些结果最终应该被解释为部分相关性,但它们支持以下论点。市场力量和后唯物主义价值观的兴起可能已经瓦解了植根于宗教(尤其是在天主教和新教世界)的职业道德的最初作用。然而,与天主教、新教和伊斯兰教相关的社会政治伦理继续表现在人际信任、道德标准和性别平等的态度差异以及政治偏好上。对历史上受天主教、新教和伊斯兰教影响较大的地区的补充分析支持了这一论点,并表明这三种宗教之间目前的态度差异更多地与它们的文化和历史遗产有关,而不是与目前个人对其特定教义的承诺有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Catholics, Protestants and Muslims: Similar work ethics, different social and political ethics

This paper employs data from the World Values Survey (1995–2020) and the European Values Study (1999–2020) to test three hypotheses on attitudinal differences between Catholics, Protestants and Muslims: (1) the work ethic hypothesis, which covers attitudes towards work and some fundamental characteristics of the market economy; (2) the social ethic hypothesis, which concerns interpersonal trust, ethical standards and attitudes towards gender equality; (3) the political ethic hypothesis, which involves attitudes towards democracy and political violence, institutional trust and preferences for government-organized redistribution. The empirical analysis provides very little support for the work ethic hypothesis but solid support for the social and political ethic hypothesis. Although the results should be ultimately interpreted as partial correlations, they support the following argument. Market forces and the rise of post-materialist values may have dissolved the original role of a work ethic rooted in religion (especially in the Catholic and Protestant world). Yet, the socio-political ethic associated with Catholicism, Protestantism and Islam continues to manifest itself in attitudinal differences concerning interpersonal trust, ethical standards and gender equality, and in political preferences. A complementary analysis of regions with a historically strong influence of Catholicism, Protestantism and Islam supports this argument and suggests that the current attitudinal differences between the three religions are more related to their cultural and historical legacy than to current personal commitment to their specific doctrines.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
66
审稿时长
45 days
期刊介绍: The mission of the Journal of Comparative Economics is to lead the new orientations of research in comparative economics. Before 1989, the core of comparative economics was the comparison of economic systems with in particular the economic analysis of socialism in its different forms. In the last fifteen years, the main focus of interest of comparative economists has been the transition from socialism to capitalism.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信