Sociological View Of Religion

Secularisation theory has argued that modernisation has undermined religion. The importance of science and technology on economic development and rational worldview on which they depend on are seen as destroying the belief in supernatural. However religion can contribute to development, but most recently sociologists have examined what role religion may play in development in today’s globalising world.

In DHN, Durkheim argues that sociology must examine what an individual consists of because it is a result of the whole society. It is this society

Through ethnographic research, Durkheim can explain the fundamentals of religion and its relation to society. We are not born with the innate knowledge of structural situations or cultural effects that occur within a society. Nor, are we aware of the effects our behaviors and attitudes have on a society. Durkheim’s worked untimely explained how the moral realm functioned by focusing on primitive religion. Religious ceremonies closely resemble social life, containing highly routined acts. The essential elements of religion include rites which are expressed by rituals and practice. Rituals unite social groups regardless of individual differences, which are found in both modern and traditional societies because rituals are a part of both. Durkheim noted, to have a

Religion is a social institution composed of a unified system of beliefs, symbols, and rituals that guides human life, including behaviors and values. I agree with the claim that the sociological study of religion makes one’s religious faith stronger in societies and communities because the more knowledgeable you are of your religion, the more you follow and practice its beliefs. Reading the books of the religion of your choice allows you to choose the lifestyle you live and control your beliefs. Sociologically studying one’s religion cannot damage religious faith unless you are sociologically studying a religion other than yours. Your devotion to your religion has been given to you at birth, and normally children follow their parents before anyone else.

Therefore, Durkheim would also argue that religion is mirrored after society, meaning that as society evolves — specifically in the technological realm — religious practices will follow suit. This will occur because “religious representations are collective representations which express collective realities”, meaning Durkheim would probably think that online churches are meant to appeal to modern ideals (McIntosh, 1997). As Durkheim states in Religion and Society, “the rites are a manner of acting, which take rise in the midst of the assembled groups which are destined to excite, maintain or recreate certain mental states…”, he further establishes that religious groups will do what is necessary to conform to what is happening in society in order to stay relevant (McIntosh, 1997). Durkheim would probably argue in favor of these online for-profit church practices because it brings a sense of unity to modern society, and acts as a way to revitalize the conscience collective, and churches provide “a society whose members are united by the fact that they think in the same way in regard to the sacred world (McIntosh, 1997). Online churches might provide a new ritual that serves to remind us of our social solidarity. In opposition, Durkheim might argue that online for-profit churches bring with them a lack of anomie. As stated by

Social sciences such as sociology and psychology, have differences and similarities to religion. To begin with, both concepts deal with the searching for great knowledge regarding the outside world. From this common point each discipline approaches the problem differently, but they both attempt to apply their respective principles to the solving of pressing sociocultural issues. For example, social sciences may attempt to answer questions through observation and statistical analysis while religion would focus on the literacy deconstruction of sacred text and the pursuit of inner knowledge in order to uncover new meanings to the writings. In other words, social sciences try to approach controversial issues from a human perspective; the collective

Conversely, according to (Turner 23-109), Durkheim points out that religion is part and parcel of the society and that each society has religion. Emile Durkheim’s purpose was to assess the connection between particular religions in various cultures, and finding a common cause. Basically, he wanted to comprehend the three major aspects of religion; that is the empirical together with the social and the spirituality components. His definition of religion is that; it is a joining arrangement of beliefs together with practices in relation to sacred things. According to him, it is religion that establishes the contemporary society as

Emile Durkheim was a taught by a teacher and to add was a sociologist. Durkheim singularly developed sociology and is credited for expanding to academic discipline, social structures, social relationships, and social institutions, in attempt to understand human nature. Later Durkheim took these and applied them into religion. Durkheim focused on the importance of the concept of the sacred" and its relevance to the welfare of the entire community.

He saw rituals as a way for people of a society to preserve their unity with one another. Emile Durkheim’s theory was that while people were partaking in rituals they would put aside their self-centered tendencies and become a part of their society. He believed that rituals would bring such a powerful bond between the participants. The rituals needed to continue to be performed to keep the bond alive. Emile Durkheim inspired A.R Radcliffe-Brown who agreed with his theories.

The analysis and comparison of Karl Marx and Emile understanding of religion Introduction This essay analyses and compares the views of both Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim on religion. It encompasses the views of other scholars on the same subject. For instance scholars like Gorsuch (1988) saw religion as an important variable in people's lives and yet Marx and Durkheim view religion absolutely in an unexpected way, nevertheless both of them concur that religion is a vital part of a general public. Amid his profession, Marx talked little on the subject of religion.

Durkheim considered religion within a social context. His primary concepts involve the “separation between the sacred and profane; ideas of souls

According to author Randall Collins, Emile Durkheim has been deemed sociologies most famous representative (Collins, The Durkheimian Tradition, 211.) The Durkeimian Tradition is “sociology’s most original and unusual set of ideas but revolutionary in the same sense ” (Collins, 211). Durkheim contributed an insightful view on the role of religion and how “God is the symbol of the society and its moral power over individuals” (Collins, 211.) By proving that “religion is the moral foundation of society” simply shows the dire need of religion in order to live. As a result of following any religion comes a consistent ritual, no matter what steps it consists of and a link to social interaction. According to Durkheim, rituals are instrumental in the process of providing concepts or ideas that directly echo the structure of society (Collins, 212.) Durkeim’s original beliefs still apply to the structure of society today. Though it may not be solely focused on religion, people identify themselves within other social groups. I myself identify to be apart of a social group with my involvement in the women’s basketball team at Hofstra. Like other student-athletes, there is an obvious distinction of athletes around campus and noticeable segregation between athletes and regular students. Durkheim discussed rituals that took place amongst those who followed a religion, and like that social group; my team performs

Moreover, Durkheim compares religion to society. He says that society is the cause of the unique sensations of the religious experiences, so called “sui generis” (Ritzer, 84). This concept

The crux of Emile Durkheim’s The Elementary Forms of Religious Life lies in the concept of collective effervescence, or the feelings of mutually shared emotions. Through a hermeneutical approach, Durkheim investigates the reflexiveness of social organization, the balance between form and content, and the immense cooperation in collective representations. In his work, society is the framework of humanity and gives it meaning, whereas religion acts as the tool to explain it. Since society existed prior to the individual, the collective mind must be understood before the concept of the individual can be grasped. However, one component seems missing from his social theory – what underlies society in terms of rituals and rites? Only when this

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.