Durkheim’s study of religion in The Elementary Forms of Religious Life is widely renowned to be one of the founding theories and definitions of the sociology of religion. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life presents Durkheim’s core belief that sociology of religion should be studied in a rational and objective manner. This essay will go into the definition of religion provided in chapter 2 in depth, particularly Durkheim’s sacred and profane dichotomy, which he views as fundamental to religion, and his controversial denial of the divine being necessary for all religions. This essay will examine the counterargument of how the Divine could arguably be a feature common in all religions. Furthermore, we will focus on Durkheim 's problematic …show more content…
He claims that the only differentiation between magic and religion is the lack of unity of people living the same life in magic, as he expresses ‘the magician stands aloof’. The concept of the ‘Church’ is the communal faith and the similar view towards the relations between the sacred and profane. This is a popular belief among sociologists of religion. Northcott, who supports Durkheim’s religion definition, expresses that ‘religion is therefore a source of social and moral order, binding the members of society to a common social project, a set of shared values and social goals’ (1999). It is true that Durkheim regarded religion as a product of society and claimed all religion was the origin of moral beliefs. Furthermore, due to the belief that religion is a reflection of society, Durkheim rejects the belief that religiously diverse societies could successfully integrate. Stark et al believe that ‘it does not seem to have occurred to him that several faiths could generate independent, co-existing moral …show more content…
As Hinnells suggests, ‘Durkheim’s understanding of religion… appears to be heavily informed by the modern Western idea of a nation’ (2009). This is reflected in Durkheim 's choice of language, which arguably demonstrates the problematic Western Christian bias, which is commonly demonstrated by Enlightenment sociologists. Furthermore, despite Durkheim deeming ‘we have no right to keep some and exclude others [religions] and no logic to do it’, he himself is guilty of limiting his field of research. Particularly in chapter 1 of The Elementary Forms, some scholars might argue that Durkheim’s is strictly limiting himself to certain religions in order to argue certain points, particularly when considering the necessity of a ‘Church’, and his argument when refuting the necessity of the ‘supernatural’ presence in
Religion has been a controversial topic among philosophers and in this paper I am focusing
Peterson, Michael - Hasker, Reichenbach and Basinger. Philosophy of Religion - Selected Readings, Fourth Edition. 2010. Oxford University Press, NY.
Durkheim's Work in Sociology "Some studies maybe more recent, but Durkheim's work remains the most significant Sociological analysis of Suicide in modern societies" Assess the extent to which Sociological arguments and evidence support this claim. In regards to Suicide it would seem perhaps more realistic to consider the subject as an individual and personal act, a job which might seem more suitable for Psychologists to explain, it may not seem an obvious subject for a Sociologist to study. In the past it has been more commonly thought that Suicide was a result of a person's mental state, however suicide was given an all new perspective once Durkheim in 1897 used Positivist methods to study the subject. Durkheim chose this subject in attempts to illustrate the potential of society to help understand complex social processes. Since this time other Socioligists have followed in Durkheim's footsteps in the study of suicide but it is questionable whether or not other Socioligists have made quite an impact as he did.
1.) Intro: I decided to focus my Religious Ethnography on a friend whom I recently have become close with. Adhita Sahai is my friend’s name, which she later told me her first name meant “scholar.” I choose to observe and interview Adhita, after she invited me to her home after hearing about my assignment. I was very humbled that she was open to this, because not only was it a great opportunity for this paper, but it also helped me get to know Adhita better. I took a rather general approach to the religious questions that I proposed to the Sahai family because I didn’t want to push to deep, I could tell Hinduism is extremely important to this family. Because this family does not attend a religious site where they worship, I instead listened to how they do this at home as a family instead.
However if it’s in terms of gaining an understanding of how religion has developed over time and become so internal within individuals then The Elementary Forms of Religious Life can be useful in giving an insight in this. Evidently Durkheim’s intentions for why he wrote this is unclear it may be he was simply interested in the evolutionary development of religion or there may be a hidden agenda behind his work. As he was not practising a religion it might explain his emphasis of ‘other’ things being sacred or deserving recognition as well rather than typically ‘personal beings’ such as Gods, saints or spirits. This might imply Durkheim’s own idea of how to live spiritually by appreciating certain virtues and to develop your own moral guidelines and to live by them. Instead of worshipping a personal being which may cause future conflict and hatred among people who worship other personal beings. This is why he may of seen Buddhism as the ideal religion because it focuses more on scared concepts such as the Four Noble Truths rather than a supreme being which he actually believed to be a relatively new idea due to science need to separate humans from other beings. Durkheim was essentially trying to answer a complex philosophical question of what the fundamental nature of religion is through sociological means rather than philosophically. Again he tries to do this by looking at the very beginning of primitive religion, its nature and sacred concepts. Lester F Ward who wrote ‘The Essential Nature of Religion’ although published before Durkheim’s Elementary Forms of Religious Life, he again corroborates with Durkheim in the sense that in order to understand religion and its significance in this world and to the individuals who practice the religious life we must look at the very beginnings of religion and how it came to be as
Religion can be described as a social institution built up around the idea of a supernatural being or beings, and the relation of human beings to them. In addition, religion provides individuals a belief to which they understand their existence as well network of emotional support during times of distress. Moreover, religious institutions provide individuals a proper perspective of life and establish values. Religion involves three major aspects: A conception of the nature and character of divinity (2) A set of principles concerning the duties and obligations between divinity and humanity. (3) A set of behavior patterns designed to conform to God’s will (Thorman, 154). The theme of panopticisim is to assert and maintain power by being unseen. In Christianity, God, unable to be to seen, is a supernatural being with infinite power. In addition, the Holy Bible reaffirms this power and establishes accordance among civilians. The social institution of religion is a form of a panoptic system where individuals are compelled to act accordingly.
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 element is fleshed out can the individual be comprehended with respect to the collective conscience. One, out of many, possibilities is the often-overlooked influence of emotions. What is the connection between social functions and emotions? Perhaps emotions reify social solidarity by means of a collective conscience. Durkheim posits the notion that society shares a bilateral relationship with emotional experiences, for the emotions of collective effervescence derive from society but also produce and maintain the social construct.
Berger has drawn his theory from other major sociologists such as Marx, Durkheim, and Weber. Peter Berger tries to make sense of the defining religions and explains the necessity of it historically and functionally. The book “The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory
Religion is a symbolic representation of society. The sociological approach to religious belief looks at how society behaves on a whole, to answer the question, “Why are people religious?” We express our participation in religious events through plays, acts of confession, religious dances, etc. To begin to understand why we have such term, let’s understand the common elements of religion. There are different types in which people believe in or follow and that is: animatism, animism, ancestral spirits, god and goddesses, and minor supernatural beings. Beyond these different elements, such one is to have religious leaders to follow.
Smart, Ninian. "Blackboard, Religion 100." 6 March 2014. Seven Dimensions of Religion. Electronic Document. 6 March 2014.
Parsons claims that religion is our primary source of meaning; it answers the eternal questions and help to understand things like suffering and pain. It also produces, sacralises and legitimises the core values of society e.g. Protestantism in the USA encouraged individualism, democracy and equality of opportunity. Bellah claims that there is a civil religion and gives the example of America and its faith in Americanism, he says that civil religion unites society. However the functionalist view can be criticised: It focuses on the positive aspects of religion and ignores that it is the cause of conflict in much of the world e.g. Northern Ireland and conflict between protestants and Catholics, It does not explain the origins of religion, explaining what functions religion performs does not help us to know where it came from. Durkheim did his studies I small scale non-literate societies, it is difficult to see how religion performs its functions in out large complex religiously plural society.
some, such as Karl max saw that religion is a way strong of a tool that impairs social evaluation. Which resulted in ethnic and religious cleansing and furthermore proved to be the wrong approach to defining the role that religion plays in societies behaviors. I for one, think that religion is an indispensable and integral part of human sociology; furthermore, I believe understanding this relationship would lead to social development.
Religion is an organized collection of beliefs and cultural systems that entail the worship of a supernatural and metaphysical being. “Religion just like other belief systems, when held onto so much, can stop one from making significant progress in life”. Together with religion come traditions that provide the people with ways to tackle life’s complexities. A subscription to the school of thought of great scholars
During the European industrialization, theorist Émile Durkheim was the first to analyze religion in terms of societal impact. Durkheim defined religion as a “unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things” (Keirns, N. et al, p. 337, 2012). In terms of society, Durkheim overall believed that religion is about community: It binds people together (social cohesion), promotes behavior consistency (social control), and offers strength for people during life’s tribulations (meaning and purpose) (Keirns, N. et al, p. 337, 2012). He held that the source of religion is the collective mind-set of society and that this cohesive bond of social order resulted from common values in a society (Keirns, N. et al, p. 337, 2012). Additionally, he contended that these values need to be maintained to sustain social stability (Keirns, N. et al, p. 337,
Modern society and its people have the ability to make a vast range of choice when it comes to anything in their lives. People to today have the ability and free will to choose their partners, their careers, their aspirations in life and their own religion. In the opinion of Peter L. Berger, written in his 1979 book ‘The Heretical Imperative’, modern times provide three fundamental options in relation to religion; the first being ‘The deductive option’, which reaffirms a certain religious tradition in spit of counter claims against it (e.g. Islamic fundamentalism); the second is the reductive option, which modernizes a religious tradition in term which make it sensible or understandable in todays most important modes of though. The final option is called the ‘inductive option’, which turns external forms of authority to individual experience (e.g. William James and the varieties of religious experience). By looking at these options deeper and look at opposing views to Berger’s theory and personal religious preference will give the reader a clearer view of Berger’s ‘The Heretical Imperative’.