Usury and Just Compensation: Religious and Financial Ethics in Historical Perspective

Journal of Business Ethics 72 (1):1-15 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Usury is a concept often associated more with religiously based financial ethics, whether Christian or Islamic, than with the secular world of contemporary finance. The problem is compounded by a tendency to interpret riba, prohibited within Islam, as both usury and interest, without adequately distinguishing these concepts. This paper argues that in Christian tradition usury has always evoked the notion of money demanded in excess of what is owed on a loan, disrupting a relationship of equality between people, whereas interest was seen as referring to just compensation to the lender. Although it is often claimed that hostility towards ‘usury’ has been in retreat in the West since the protestant Reformation, we would argue that the crucial break came not with Calvin, but with Jeremy Bentham, whose critique of the arguments of Adam Smith, upholding the reasonableness of the laws against usury, led to the abolition of the usury laws in England in 1854. There has to be a role for law, whether Islamic or secular, in regulating financial relationships. We argue that by retrieving the necessary distinction between demanding usury as illegitimate predatory lending and interest as legitimate compensation, we can discover common ground behind the driving principles of financial ethics within both Islamic and Christian tradition that may still be of relevance today. By re-examining past ethical discussions of the distinction between usury and just compensation, we argue that the world’s religious traditions can make significant contributions to contemporary debate.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,197

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Conflicts of interest? The ethics of usury.Martin Lewison - 1999 - Journal of Business Ethics 22 (4):327 - 339.
Using Inside Job to Teach Business Ethics.Ernest N. Biktimirov & Don Cyr - 2013 - Journal of Business Ethics 117 (1):209-219.
How Much Compensation Can CEOs Permissibly Accept?Jeffrey Moriarty - 2009 - Business Ethics Quarterly 19 (2):235-250.
An ethical perspective on CEO compensation.Mel Perel - 2003 - Journal of Business Ethics 48 (4):381-391.
God and Advanced Mammon—Can Theological Types Handle Usury and Capitalism?David Brat - 2011 - Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and Theology 65 (2):168-179.
A Moral and Economic Defense of Executive Compensation.John Dobson - 2011 - Business and Professional Ethics Journal 30 (1-2):59-70.
Does Distributive Justice Pay? Sternberg’s Compensation Ethics.Jeffrey Moriarty - 2011 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (1):33-48.
Religious Ethics as a Field and Discipline.John P. Reeder Jr - 1978 - Journal of Religious Ethics 6 (1):32 - 53.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
61 (#265,071)

6 months
4 (#797,974)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Re-thinking Capitalism: What We can Learn from Scholasticism?Domènec Melé - 2016 - Journal of Business Ethics 133 (2):293-304.
The Ethics of Payday Loan Practices.Dinah Payne & Cecily Raiborn - 2013 - Ethics and Behavior 23 (2):117-132.
2008 Financial Crisis and Islamic Finance: An Unrealized Opportunity.Fahad Al-Zumai & Mohammed Al-Wasmi - 2016 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 29 (2):455-472.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Prospectus.[author unknown] - 1948 - Synthese 7 (1):6-9.
Masters, Princes, and Merchants: Text.John W. Baldwin - 1970 - Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Add more references