Science and Religion in Argentina: Mapping Moral and Epistemological Conflicts Through Moral Foundations Theory.
Saved in:
| Title: | Science and Religion in Argentina: Mapping Moral and Epistemological Conflicts Through Moral Foundations Theory. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Fitz Herbert, Arturo L. (AUTHOR), Sharp, Carissa (AUTHOR), Rivera, Reynaldo (AUTHOR), Pittaro, Esteban (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.). Jun2026, Vol. 65 Issue 2, p270-280. 11p. |
| Subjects: | Moral foundations theory, Evangelicalism, Elite (Social sciences), Ethical problems, Philosophy of religion, Cross-cultural studies, Theory of knowledge |
| Geographic Terms: | Argentina |
| Abstract: | Most studies on science and religion attitudes assume that science and religion are contradictory belief systems. Since Evans reframed them as institutions offering moral definitions, scholars have increasingly explored moral conflicts. Drawing on 63 interviews and 6 focus groups in Argentina, we analyzed moral and epistemological conflict attitudes using grounded theory and Moral Foundations Theory. We found patterns similar to Western contexts: Systemic epistemological conflict was concentrated among secular intellectual elites, while propositional conflict appeared mostly among conservative Evangelicals. However, we also uncovered novel insights. Participants from all backgrounds perceived moral conflicts, but emphasized different moral foundations: Harm, fairness, and liberty were more frequent among non‐religious participants, while religious individuals drew on all six foundations. We identified 11 recurring moral judgments that may inform future cross‐cultural research. Our study contributes to science and religion scholarship by expanding conceptual and methodological frameworks and by highlighting the importance of moral dimensions in shaping public perceptions across cultural settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.) is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Most studies on science and religion attitudes assume that science and religion are contradictory belief systems. Since Evans reframed them as institutions offering moral definitions, scholars have increasingly explored moral conflicts. Drawing on 63 interviews and 6 focus groups in Argentina, we analyzed moral and epistemological conflict attitudes using grounded theory and Moral Foundations Theory. We found patterns similar to Western contexts: Systemic epistemological conflict was concentrated among secular intellectual elites, while propositional conflict appeared mostly among conservative Evangelicals. However, we also uncovered novel insights. Participants from all backgrounds perceived moral conflicts, but emphasized different moral foundations: Harm, fairness, and liberty were more frequent among non‐religious participants, while religious individuals drew on all six foundations. We identified 11 recurring moral judgments that may inform future cross‐cultural research. Our study contributes to science and religion scholarship by expanding conceptual and methodological frameworks and by highlighting the importance of moral dimensions in shaping public perceptions across cultural settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 00218294 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/jssr.70028 |
