The separation of economy and sentiment: a comparison of how individuals perceive hostile worlds

Analyses of the relationship between economy and sentiment tend to focus on connection rather than separation. Scholars recognize that individuals sometimes identify moral conflicts between economy and sentiment, but primarily focus their research on the boundary or relational work performed to mitigate or disappear the conflict. Instead, I analyze how individuals talk about the relationship between economy and sentiment as separate or hostile, comparing two theoretically distinct groups: non-religious individuals and practicing evangelicals. The comparison allows me to analyze patterns of discourse and boundary-making based on access to institutionalized culture. I find that both groups articulate perceptions of hostile worlds by: (1) maintaining the taboo against talking about money, (2) recommending neutral separation, and (3) demarcating areas of life as too sacred for money. Through comparison, I find that non-religious respondents describe a less permeable vertical boundary line, whereby economy and sentiment are separated into separate spheres, as if side-by-side, while evangelicals describe a more permeable horizontal boundary line, where separation is maintained through the use of consistent hierarchical discourses that assert the moral importance of sentiment over economy. My findings underscore how unequal access to cultural schema differentially shape how individuals connect economy and sentiment, if at all.