Social insurance, commitment, and the origin of law: interest bans in early christianity by Jared Rubin
Material type:data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6b0ba/6b0ba83dea1b2061c05bcfba62c4cc7e8d358d60" alt="Text"
- text
- unmediated
- volume
- 00222186
- HB73 JOU
Item type | Current library | Call number | Vol info | Copy number | Status | Notes | Date due | Barcode | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
Main Library - Special Collections | HB73 JOU (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | Vol. 52, no.4 (pages 761-778) | SP4268 | Not for loan | For in house only |
Browsing Main Library shelves, Shelving location: - Special Collections Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
Despite the historical importance of ideology‐based, economically inhibitive laws, we know little about the economic factors underlying their origin. This paper accounts for the historical emergence of one such law: the Christian ban on taking interest—a doctrine that shaped the evolution of numerous financial contracts and related organizational forms. A game‐theoretic analysis and historical evidence suggest that the Church’s commitment to providing social insurance for its poorest constituents encouraged risky borrowing, which the Church attempted to limit by banning interest. The analysis highlights the applicability of the rational choice framework to seemingly irrational actions and laws, the role of nonmonetary sanctions in circumventing commitment problems, and the importance of economic forces vis‐à‐vis ideology
There are no comments on this title.