Hofstede vacillated across editions on whether religion causes culture

Evidence

In the 1991 edition Hofstede (1991, p. 16) views religion “as a result as much as a cause of cultural differences”. In the 2005 edition (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005, p. 17) religion is “as much as, or more than a cause of cultural differences”. The comparison so far shows that Hofstede gradually views religion as more essential than culture. However, in the 2010 edition (Hofstede et al., 2010) religion can be an important factor for the cultural identity of people or groups, but cultural dimensions may have an older origin than religion. As a result, religion is an expression of culture. According to Hofstede (Hofstede et al., 2010, p. 454), “religion seems to have been a result of previously existing cultural value patterns more than a cause of cultural differences”. He (Hofstede et al., 2010, pp. 28–29) insists that religion influences moral circles but gives less essential importance to religion. Ultimately, Hofstede positions religion as dependent on culture and not as the core of a culture. — Frans Dokman, Beyond Bantu Philosophy_…, 840

Categorization

• QUESTION: Does Hofstede’s reversal across editions track a real theoretical instability shared by other culture-models (e.g., Inglehart), or just editorial drift?