On money debt and morality: Some reflections on the contribution of economic anthropology

Chris A. Gregory

doi:10.1111/j.1469-8676.2012.00225.x

On money debt and morality: Some reflections on the contribution of economic anthropology

Chris A. Gregory^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

83 Citations (SciVal)

Abstract

Peebles, in a recent review of the anthropology of debt and credit, found an 'astonishing consistency' in the moral valuation of credit which is everywhere given a positive evaluation relative to debt. But why is this? Does it apply to creditors as well? What are the theoretical implications of these questions for economic anthropology?

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	380-396
Number of pages	17
Journal	Social Anthropology
Volume	20
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8676.2012.00225.x
Publication status	Published - Nov 2012

Access to Document

10.1111/j.1469-8676.2012.00225.x

Cite this

@article{4fb91c8903a64db290063867428b657c,

title = "On money debt and morality: Some reflections on the contribution of economic anthropology",

abstract = "Peebles, in a recent review of the anthropology of debt and credit, found an 'astonishing consistency' in the moral valuation of credit which is everywhere given a positive evaluation relative to debt. But why is this? Does it apply to creditors as well? What are the theoretical implications of these questions for economic anthropology?",

keywords = "Credit, Debt, Demand sharing, Economic anthropology",

author = "Gregory, \{Chris A.\}",

year = "2012",

month = nov,

doi = "10.1111/j.1469-8676.2012.00225.x",

language = "English",

volume = "20",

pages = "380--396",

journal = "Social Anthropology",

issn = "0964-0282",

publisher = "Berghahn Journals",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - On money debt and morality

T2 - Some reflections on the contribution of economic anthropology

AU - Gregory, Chris A.

PY - 2012/11

Y1 - 2012/11

N2 - Peebles, in a recent review of the anthropology of debt and credit, found an 'astonishing consistency' in the moral valuation of credit which is everywhere given a positive evaluation relative to debt. But why is this? Does it apply to creditors as well? What are the theoretical implications of these questions for economic anthropology?

AB - Peebles, in a recent review of the anthropology of debt and credit, found an 'astonishing consistency' in the moral valuation of credit which is everywhere given a positive evaluation relative to debt. But why is this? Does it apply to creditors as well? What are the theoretical implications of these questions for economic anthropology?

KW - Credit

KW - Debt

KW - Demand sharing

KW - Economic anthropology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84868532734&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1469-8676.2012.00225.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1469-8676.2012.00225.x

M3 - Article

SN - 0964-0282

VL - 20

SP - 380

EP - 396

JO - Social Anthropology

JF - Social Anthropology

IS - 4

ER -

On money debt and morality: Some reflections on the contribution of economic anthropology

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this