Morality typically includes prosociality but often also extends to impersonal deontology. Religion, theoretically and empirically, is concerned with both moral domains. What happens when the two domains are in conflict? Do religious people prefer impersonal deontology at the detriment of prosociality? Or do their prosocial inclinations allow them to transgress conflicting moral principles, for instance through white lies? Participants (177 Belgian adults) made a choice in several hypothetical moral dilemmas and were afterwards evaluated on Haidt’s moral foundations (care, fairness, authority, loyalty, and purity) and religiosity. When the conflict implied minor consequences for the target, religiosity predicted impersonal deontology at the detriment of prosociality, because of a high endorsement of purity. However, when the consequences were severe, religiosity was unrelated to impersonal deontology due to a suppressor effect of care. The findings indicate that prosocial dispositions shape religiosity into a ‘compassionate moral rigorism’, thus protecting it from excessive moralism.

中文翻译：

---

重视关怀保护宗教信仰免受非个人义务论的反社会后果

道德通常包括亲社会性，但通常也延伸到非个人的义务论。从理论上和经验上讲，宗教都与道德领域有关。当两个域发生冲突时会发生什么？有宗教信仰的人是否更喜欢非个人的义务论而损害亲社会性？或者他们的亲社会倾向是否允许他们违反相互冲突的道德原则，例如通过善意的谎言？参与者（177 名比利时成年人）在几个假设的道德困境中做出选择，然后根据海特的道德基础（关怀、公平、权威、忠诚和纯洁）和宗教信仰进行评估。当冲突意味着目标的轻微后果时，宗教信仰预示着非个人的义务论会损害亲社会性，因为对纯洁性的高度认可。然而，当后果严重时，由于关怀的抑制作用，宗教信仰与非个人义务论无关。研究结果表明，亲社会倾向将宗教信仰塑造成一种“富有同情心的道德严谨主义”，从而保护其免受过度道德主义的影响。