Comparative Financial Systems in Judaism, Christianity and Islam: The Case of Interest
In today’s discussions the prohibition of interest, based in Shari’a law, is seen as solely an Islamic finance phenomenon and often advocated as a new way of providing financial services. It is important to recognise that the principles underpinning Shari’a are largely similar to those preached and practised by Judaism and Christianity as well as other religions. Both Judaism and Christianity have, for example, banned the receipt and payment of interest for a significant period of time, albeit that each had a slightly different interpretation on the permissibility of lending at interest. Although there is evidence about the existence of prohibitions on interest in other religions such as, for example, Buddhism, the focus of this paper is on the prohibition of interest in the three religions that are generally referred to as the Abrahamic or monotheistic faiths; Judaism, Christianity and Islam, the way in which the prohibitions entered into law and the impact on the availability of financial transactions that were executed despite the restrictions. The paper provides an insight into the way in which opinions regarding the permissibility of interest has changed over time.
Chapter 8: The Effect of Religion on Financial and Investing Decisions
Religion has a major impact on people’s daily life and is closely connected with their economic condition. The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the connection between religion and economic factors and to show how religion affects investment and financing decisions. It focuses on this interplay by emphasizing various corporate and personal facets. For instance, the chapter analyzes the effect of religious beliefs on investors’ preferences, risk perception, ethical values, and psychological behavior. This aspect is often missing in academic finance including the behavioral paradigm. Furthermore, the chapter discusses how religious beliefs can conflict with financial theory involving making financial and investing decisions.
Do Potential People Have Moral Rights?
By a potential person I shall mean an entity which is not now a person but which is capable of developing into a person, given certain biologically and/or technologically possible conditions. This is admittedly a narrower sense than some would attach to the term ‘potential'. After all, people of the twenty-fifth century, if such there will be, are in some sense potential people now, even though the specific biological entities from which they will develop, i.e. the particular gametes or concepti, do not yet exist. For there do exist, in the reproductive capacities of people now living and in the earth's resources, conditions adequate to produce these future people eventually, provided of course that various possible catastrophes are avoided. Indeed, in some sense of ‘potential’ there have been countless billions of potential people from the beginning of time. But I am concerned not with such remote potentialities but with currently existing entities that are capable of developing into people.