On the Pleasures and Dangers of Culpability

Abstract

■ This article takes up the topic of culpability by asking why so many religious converts today are opting for morally strict faiths that are centered around lists of well-defined rules to be followed and that dwell on the consequences of failing to follow them. It answers this question by first reviewing the canonical Western philosophical distinction between deontological and consequentialist approaches to ethics. It then goes on to argue that these types of ethical system thrive in different kinds of social settings. Consequentialism only works as a guide to action in settings in which stability makes outcomes predictable. Deontological ethics, by contrast, is particularly suited to situations in which the future is unpredictable. I argue that globalization has led many people in the world to find themselves living in this latter kind of situation at present. This is why they find religions focused on deontological ethical ideas appealing. I support this argument with material both on Pentecostal and Islamic religious movements. In the conclusion, I suggest that anthropology has also in recent years taken on a deontological cast, and I question whether this is the best way forward for the field.