Dear Mohd,

Thanks for the question. I am of the view that religion has a high impact on the worldviews of individuals and societies. It has been the brain behind the ethics that govern individuals and communities globally.Your observation is very true and crucial because there is the need to set a yardstick to evaluate the ethics developed from religious perspectives using stringent religious characteristics as keys. It would be a wonderful research and insight to, especially anthropologists whose specialty is in the study of religion, beliefs and value systems. All the best.

Dickson Adom

Dear Mohd,

Religion does have a role to play in developing a sense of ethics, but it is rather limited. This is because religions tend not to emphasize the role of critical and independent thinking which is important in developing a sense of ethical responsibility. What religions tend to do is to give a list of 'do's' and 'don'ts' that the faithfuls need to follow. But if does not provide much explanation as to why these rules should be followed. So you can introduce religious teachings in, say, a course on ethics for scientists, but then the main focus must be on the argumentation and the explanation as to why such and such rules are justified. In many cases we are faced with dilemmas and we have to think for ourselves. Religions can help somewhat as a guide, but in the end we must think for ourselves. Students should be developed this ability of thinking on their own.

Dear Mohd, the idea of 'measuring ethics' already appears to adopt a fairly utilitarian approach to the subject by assuming that ethics can be quantified. Taking a more historical approach I can highly recommend Nietszche's book "On the Genealogy of Morality".

Best wishes,

Iain 

The connection between religion and ethics is usually overstated, especially by the religious. the origins of ethics, the nature of which first of course requires discussion, lie in secular society not in religious societies. A short browse through religious tomes quickly confirms this. In the distant past religions, particularly Abrahamic religions, have tended to appropriate ethics from secular writings claiming the variable profundities as articulated by god (whichever one believed in at the time). Ethics in fact have beginnings in pragmatism, seen clearly in Egyptian, Mesopotamian and Canaanite cultures several millennium ago. 

Further, which scholars hold that religion influences ethics? Surely, religions cling to specific ideologies and a narrow range of perceptions? Of course the question refers mainly if not entirely to the Abrahamic group of religions, which traditionally alter, or require alteration, of perception in the processes of group identification.

To Dickson Adom: With respect, I believe you do not know much about history and especially pre-history (known about through study of hunter-gatherer societies), based on your claim that religion "has been the brain behind the ethics that govern individuals and communities globally". Religious views on moral matters grew out of pre-existing moral views innate to humans, not the reverse. And even then, the earliest religious moral views were largely mixed in with egregious moral errors. The Old testament, for example, condones and commands evils from genocide to slavery to human sacrifice--and by word-count is far, far more concerned with sacramental acts to appease an egomaniacal and jealous deity than with treating others morally. The seeming reasons for this, and the details, are endlessly fascinating, but far too numerous for discussion here, alas.

Ferrel, too true! Religion, at least the Abrahamic ones, have had by and large dire effects on human hehaviour and contrast badly with a number, a small number true, of ancient so-called pagan societies that these religions largely destroyed. Of Abrahamic holy books it is not only the Bible, essentially the Pentateuch, that provides violent instruction but more recent examples. Religions tend to manipulate ethical perception not enhance it. 

Ethics is a general idea or belief that influences people's behavior and attitudes as well as their views about what is right or wrong. Religion is driven by the various belief systems and this commands what an individual does (The mirror of his judgement-Ethics). Thus, my assertion is right because many individuals and communities have been and continue to be led or influenced by the statutes and precepts of their religious groups to act in a certain way, decision or course of life.

A window into the prehistoric times indicates that beliefs(secular moral ethics) that formed the nucleus for religion, has been the driving force behind the ethics of individuals. Thus, I still hold the view that current religious affiliations and their associated belief systems exert a degree of influence on the ethics of individuals and societies.

However, it is true that due to the fallacies in religion and its close-shut enlightenment of its moral principles, its impact on ethics is waning. Thus, I side with Prof. Soraj that religion's role in ethical development is limited and must be intensified by probably an introduction to a course of study in ethics where religious doctrine and statues would be argued empirically to justify their worth.

This is not to say that all the teachings of the religious groups aid in developing sound moral ethics because some teachings, when misunderstood in context and application, could be a destructive weapon of one's ethics instead of enhancing it (@ Prof. Stanley). Thus, what religion can do to foster global development is to re-engineer/re-structure the understandings and explanations to its teachings to better enhance the ethics of persons and societies for global development.

A good answer but still the problem lies-the association of religion with ethics in the ancient world has been distorted by the largely literary endeavours of a hotch-potch of scribes/priests. Religion inhabits a will to power set of paradigms, not given or subject to empirical evaluation. Hebrew ethics (what exactly are/were they and can they really be so classified?) evolved to control a small probably culturally divergent remnant around Jerusalem. Christian ethics have their origins elsewhere, partly in Egyptian secular wisdom literature, many Islamic ethical troupes have their origins in ancient (pagan and secular) Mesopotamia, and all were created in specific if changing political contexts. Also, religious groups have had plenty of time to create binding ethics but instead have often subjected the world to archaic visions and behaviour and those apparent expressions of religious ethics that have given us hospitals and other benificent institutions can also be found, or the impetus can, in the most ancient cities (Sumeria) and are consistent with urban inventiveness and community-based needs to collaborate and survive. Let us not forget that the Bible was largely created as a form of wishful thinking as Israel and Judah faced annihilation, and the non-violence of Christianity was in response to Roman might and ruthlessness. 

I prefer the word spirituality to religion.  From all comments above, the challenges of using religion as the basis for ethics, ignores the need to understand the different ways that a religion can influence behavior for good or for evil.   An understanding of the ways that the word like spirituality might be operationalized to reflect an "ideal type" (Max Weber) might be more  useful in linking one's values (system of ethics) to one's behavior.

Spirituality is too general. I posted my question to get some views from others on how religion can influence peoples behavior and then how this can shape ethical behavior in organization. 

I hope this article can help you:

Religiosity and ethical behaviour in organizations: A symbolic interactionist perspective, GR Weaver & BR Agle, Academy of management review, 2002

I find the original question puzzling, and the answers here so far even more so. Any study of history reveals the pervasive influence of people's religious beliefs about what is right and wrong--an impact that has been horrid as well as genuinely moral. Given how obvious this is, can Mr. Salleh say more plainly what he is getting at?

Nor, I couldn't access the article you advise as it requires signing into the site, which I am not willing to do. As the abstract indicates that the article's concern is business related, this appears to raise additional areas of thought. Ferrel the matter is obvious if you immediately reject any connection between morality/ethics (not the same thing) and religion as I certainly do. Adhering to a religious perspective requires connecting to systems of belief that accord with motivations only tenuously tied to, certainly, ethical behaviour but are tied instead to views of living, views (invariably false or distorted) of history, views of behaviour-invariably comical or absurd-involving imaginings of other reality planes and dimensions. I must stress again, the wisdom literature (with their specific ethical attitudes) from where the Abrahamic religions get their ethical stances is thousands of years old and secular in origin. the presentations of goodness the three religions propagate largely stem from the same source, are conservative in nature and described as in opposition to badness, usually individulistic in nature. Ethics really is a disputed idea, however intuitive it seems.

Mr. Wilkin, I gather I share your view about the disconnect between genuine morality and religion, but I understand the original question to be about the impact of religious BELIEF on people's conduct related to moral matters. That has historically been massive, for good and ill.

Ferrel, thanks I gethered you shared my general perspective on religion, but the question actually doesn't mention belief. It appears to take a positive view on religion's alliance (or probably originating) ethical conditions and that these positive outcomes should or can be expanded upon to enable a general, comprehensive ethical measurement. God (as they say) forbid! My points are reiterated to prevent any such unlikely possibility as, yet again, ethics have nothing to do with religion and are rarely discernible within them. 

Mr. Wilkin is certainly seeing things in Mr. Salleh's posts that I do not. Only the latter can tell us what he meant.

Yes bridging subject is Philosophy .