Markets need morality: perspectives from Islam, Christianity, and China

• Date: 29 November 2019
• Published date: 29 November 2019
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOES-12-2017-0225
• Pages: 73-86
• Author: Jonathan Edward Leightner
• Subject Matter: Economics,Social economics

Markets need morality:

perspectives from Islam,

Christianity, and China

Jonathan Edward Leightner

Hull College of Business, Augusta University –Summerville Campus,

Augusta, Georgia, USA

Abstract

Purpose –This paper aims to argue that markets need a foundationof morality to promote the long-run

success of an economy.

Design/methodology/approach –Three types of ethical theories are discussed and compared with

what the sacred scripturesof Islam and Christianity say and with what economic theory says. Examples from

China are provided.

Findings –Marketsneed morality.

Research limitations/implications –There are more religions in the world than just Islam and

Christianity; however, space limitations force me to only consider those two religions. Furthermore, there are more

countries in the world than just China. However, space limitations force me to only pull examples from China.

Practical implications –Economists shouldrecognize that markets need morality, and theyshould start

teachingthat to their students.

Social implications –If markets are built on a foundation of ethics,then society prospers. In the absence

of that foundation, societiesfalter. When a government, business and religious institutionssee each other as

complementaryforces, then ethics can evolve.

Originality/value –The author knows of no other studiesthat explain the three types of ethical theories,

compares those theories to what the sacred scriptures of Islam and Christianity say and to what economic

theory says,and then uses examples from China to illustratethe need for morality.

Keywords China, Islam, Morality, Christianity

Paper type Conceptual paper

1. Introduction

A survey of the ethics literaturereveals that there are at least three major groups of theories.

One group includes Nicolle Machiavelli, Friedrich Nietzsche and Ayn Rand who would

argue that a person has a moral obligation to make the most that he or she can out of him or

herself. This group makes self-centeredness the foundation of their ethics. At the opposite

extreme, the Utilitarian School would argue that each person should make decisions based

on what maximizes humanity’s total utility without giving more weight to what he or she

personally gets than the weight given to every other person. This view dilutes the self’s

desires so much that for practicalpurposes, this view endorses “selflessness.”A middle path

is found in the world’s dominant religions, which requires that all people be treated with

dignity and respect andthat certain rules be followed. These rules include do not murder, lie,

steal, commit adultery or cheat. However, relegating religion solely to this middle path for

ethics over simplifies many religions. For example, the sacred texts of Islam and

Christianity contain passages that could be cited in support for all three of these groups;

how-be-it with certainqualifications.

Markets need

morality

73

Received16 December 2017

Revised13 January 2018

9July2018

14July 2018

27July 2018

29August 2019

Accepted10 September 2019

InternationalJournal of Ethics and

Systems

Vol.36 No. 1, 2020

pp. 73-86

© Emerald Publishing Limited

2514-9369

DOI 10.1108/IJOES-12-2017-0225

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/2514-9369.htm