Sacred values are inviolable in conviction yet flexible in application due to interpretive ambiguity

Evidence

Clingingsmith’s study suggests that when believers are encouraged to reimagine their communities, their moral compass widens to include previously excluded or denigrated groups. And as Scott Atran and Robert Axelrod explain, sacred values are held with absolute conviction and are seen to be inviolable; yet due to ambiguities of interpretation, there is latitude as to how they are applied. This means that sacred values can be reframed, just as the boundaries of one’s moral community can be reframed. — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 549

Categorization

• XREF: Central to the Rodrigues analysis: the fumi-e forces the surface trampling but the sacred value’s interpretive latitude shapes whether apostasy counts — parallels Baumard’s partner-choice mechanism in reverse. — connects to: Norms and values can be cognitively examined, unlike bare preferences — Jürgen Habermas, A New Structural Transformation of the…, 61; Authenticity’s ambiguity is functional because it serves many objectives — Alice E. Marwick, Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity,…, 288; Sacred values function as cognitive structures against ambiguity and uncertainty. — Hammad Sheikh and Jeremy Ginges and Alin Coman and Scott Atran, Religion, group threat and sacred values, 19 (+3 more)
• DEFINE: Precisely defines the sacred-values framework (Atran and Axelrod): absolute conviction plus interpretive latitude.
• DEEPTHINKING: The tension between inviolability and interpretive latitude is a genuinely subtle mechanism for how apparently absolute commitments bend without breaking — directly load-bearing for the whole analytical project.