Karl Marx, Max Weber and Emile Durkheim offered differing perspectives on the role of religion. Choose the theorist whose insights you prefer and theorists views over the others.

Karl Marx himself was an atheist and Marxism is an atheistic ideology, meaning that they take distance from the belief that there is a God . He meant that “in the country of reason” the mere existence of God can have no meaning . He gave an example that if you brought your God to a foreign country that worshipped other Gods, they will provide proof of the non-existence of your God . However, Marx did not address religion in a systematic fashion in any of his writing but at the same time he touches on the subject recurrently in books, speeches and pamphlets. The reason for this is that one can clearly see that his critique of religion forms one piece of his overall critique of society. In order to be able to understand his critique of religion,

Assess the view that religion is a major source of instability and conflict in society today Religion has held an important role in society since the beginning of civilisation and it has such power over people’s minds and shape the way our world developed. Whilst some sociological theories such as

Perspectives of Emile Durkheim and Karl Marx The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were full of evolving social and economic ideas. These views of the social structure of urban society came about through the development of ideas taken from the past revolutions. As the Industrial Revolution progressed through out the world,

Throughout this essay, an attempt to compare and contrast two key theorists approach to the study of religion namely Durkheim and Freud will take place. This will consist of four stages, firstly an introduction comprising of a definition of religion by Durkheim will occur. Secondly a comparison and contrast of the approaches by Freud and Durkheim to the study of religion, as well as the strength and weaknesses of these approaches and lastly a presentation of a conclusion will occur.

Name: Crystal Henrick FL6132 Compare and contrast the various early European urban theorists as found in Chapter 1 of the course text. (300-400 words) The two theorists i’ve decided to compare and contrast are Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim. Firstly i’ll compare them to one another. From all the readings I did

While both Locke and Marx believed that religion should be held separate from politics, diversion in ideology can be seen through the fact that Locke felt that religious life should be privatized, while Marx believed that religion becomes superfluous, and therefore unnecessary in a society in which power is appropriated to all of its masses. Locke’s “Letter Concerning Toleration” and Marx’s “Manifesto of the Communist Party” showcase the dynamic, oft-conflicting nature of power and control that the institution of formalized religion and politics have imparted on human consciousness, with Locke and Marx proving similar in their convictions that politics should be distinctly maintained, though differing on their stance on the privatization of

Generally, Marx’s position on religion is drawn up in an entirely negative manner. In his writings, he expresses his belief that religion is a set of doctrines intended to stabilize, while at the same time bring into servitude the working class people. In addition to that, he argues that the society’s inclination towards religious excitement serves to represent a reaction to disaffection. Also, Marx contends that, since religion causes human beings to feel delusive happiness it makes an erroneous mental representation in as well as of itself. Indeed to him, it is an instrument utilized to sustain cultural systems together with ideologies that in most cases encourages oppression in the society (Parsons 38-46).

Russell McCutcheon urges terms like “religion” and “religious” should not be used by scholars when referring to the study of religion. McCutcheon even suggests these words should be abandoned and removed from our vocabulary all together. He claims studying social sciences like anthropology, sociology, and psychology and using appropriate terminology

Religion at the time of the Communist Manifesto Following the Industrial Revolution in 19th century Europe, change was in full swing and religion began to have different meanings for different people. The upper-class citizens used Religion, namely Christianity,

Durkheim: Society and Religion As I read Émile Durkheim’s classic piece, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, I experienced a whirlwind of thoughts, expressing agreement, disagreement, and complete puzzlement over the details of his logic and conclusions. As far as my essay goes, I will attempt to put these

Karl Marx’s view of society was based around the economy. All other social structures according to Marx, such as religion, family values, and politics stem from the base, the economy. Religion played no part at all in Marx’s sociological views. He is known as an atheist. He believed that religion was nothing more than a burden on society. “The

Durkheim and Weber both had distinct theories as they expressed and conceptualized religion and it’s impact to society in quite different ways however, they somehow overall parallel each others theories. Durkheim observed religion in the context of the integrated society and recognized its place in affecting the reasoning and conduct of society.Max Weber saw religion as how it fortifies other social organizations. Weber suspected that the religious belief setup contributed a social system that SUPPORTED the improvement of other social organizations, like the economy. Weber is also addressing the shrinking hold of religion in modern society.”(Veugelers) This notionally theorizes that both philosophers acknowledge the importance of religion as influencing and supporting society. As indicated by Durkheim, people consider religion to be adding to the wellbeing

Similarly to Weber, Durkheim believed that religion plays an integral part in society. He defined religion as a “unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things… beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral community called a church...” (Durkheim EF: 47). This functional definition describes what Durkheim believes what role religion plays in contemporary society: it unities it. He analyzed religion within the context of the entire society and recognized its influence on people’s thoughts and behaviors. Durkheim was interested in the communal bonds forged by participating in religious activities and stressed the importance of the communal aspect of religion.

A religion can be seen as a unified system of beliefs and practices which are relative to sacred things and beliefs (Giddens 1972, p.224). It can shape ones thoughts and feelings and gives people a sense of hope and something to believe in. All three main sociologist writers Karl Marx, Max Weber and Emile Durkheim offer different perspectives on religion and how important it is to society. Some of the theorists chose to have a positive view whilst others argue the unimportance of religion. This essay attempts to discover which theorist has the most accurate perspective of religion in modern times. This is done by firstly explaining the basic ideas regarding to religion put forward by Marx, Weber and Durkheim. Then both Marx's and

In order to truly assess the legitimacy of Durkheim 's functionalist definition of religion, his notion of Social facts, (upon which his theory is constructed) must be examined. Durkheim advocated that amongst the reputable fields of biology, psychology and history, Sociology also warranted a specific focus. It was, for him: a 'sui generis ' "something that had to be explained on its own terms". Sociology was not, for Durkheim, a field that should be susceptible to overlapping subject matter: he believed that there existed concrete social facts recognisable "by the power of eternal coercion" which they are "capable of exercising over individuals". This claim is an imperative one because it is the platform on which his functionalist