A famous example of this was Martin Luther Kings ‘I have a dream’ speech, his use of religion in his passionate speech for equality helped to motivate people in society to push for social change, and ultimately changed America’s legislation and outlook on integration and equality between the black and white community in America. This shows that religion is a force for social change. Furthermore the church acts as a an ‘honest broker’ between two groups, in this case the church was the middle ground between the government and the African American community, this once again means that religion is a clear force in social change, this is because the church was capable of bringing the two communities together through religion. The church did this by spreading messages such as ‘love thy neighbour’ which promoted more equality in society, this means that the influence the church
Emile Durkheim and Karl Marx offer a wide array of thoughts and ideas regarding to religion. Firstly, Emile Durkheim's views of religion will be explained. Durkheim chose to adopt the idea that if religion gave birth to everything essential in society it is because society is the soul of religion. Thus, Durkheim chose to view religion as a function which can strengthen social bonds whilst also integrating individuals into society. Durkheim also believed that religion is divided up into two separate sections - the sacred and the profane.
He was able to utilize the previous autocrats’ work as a springboard for his reign to complete the act of emancipating the serfs. Other motives for emancipation stemmed from the religious ideologies held by Alexander II. Striving for a “common good”, Christian charity, and equality were all factors that contributed to Alexander II’s push to emancipate the serfs. Religious ideology permeates the language used by Alexander II in his emancipation edict and speeches. This use of language reflects the deeply held religious convictions that he held and used as inspiration for many of his decisions.
Religion usually follows beliefs and requires certain types of following or behaviours. There are many theories when it comes religion and society. Marx suggests that it acts as a powerful agent of social control, and Weber suggests religion effects social change. Whereas Durkheim suggests that religion promotes social integration. There are different theories in sociology and the first of these is the fundamentalist theory....
Although there are differences between Islam and Christianity such as an authoritarian perspective versus a democratic perspective, respectively, one can perceive several uniting characteristics after an in-depth review. For example, both religions are based on paternalistic governed society. In addition, both emphasize and define “right” or “spiritual living” and the consequences of sin. Granted, Christianity and Islam contain people that are counterproductive to the ideals of the religion. Both inherently believe that their higher power, despite the difference in name, is the ultimate judge and directs the paths of his followers.
Tocqueville argues that the only thing which will keep Americans away from these dangers, which would undoubtedly lead to despotism is religion as source of moral education. He says that all decisions by man are a result of the values which man has received from god and without these values we would be left to a life full of disorder. Religion indirectly affects the state through mores which are described as “the whole moral and intellectual state of a people.”(287) These mores are what prevents democracies from being engulfed by the dangers which are products of tyranny and despotism. In a state without religion “each man gets into the way of having nothing but confused and changing notions about the matters of greatest importance to himself and his fellows”(444) and when combating materialism, the presence of religion “places the
Functionalist view on religion This essay is to assess the functionalist theory and view that religion benefits both societies as a whole and its individual members and also to take in consideration their criticism, but to mainly focus on two sociologist Durkheim and Parsons. Religion for sociologist is defined in three ways which are substantive, functional and social constructionist. The substantive definition of religion is focusing on the content or religious belief in god or the supernatural. The functional definition is its social or psychological functions it performs for society and individual. The last definition of religion for sociologist is social construction of it which is that there is no single universal definition of religion since so many exist and there is no consensus term of religion among any of them.
To what extent do sociologists agree that religion creates social harmony. Sociologists have many different views on religion and how it affects us and our society. For Functionalists, religion plays a key role in creating value consensus and social solidarity. Emile Durkheim was one of the first Functionalists to develop this idea. For Durkheim, the key feature of religion was the distinction between the sacred and profane.
Religion within society has a huge impact on the structure of social control. There are two definitions of what religion is, the belief in a supernatural being (Weber), and the separation of the sacred from the profane (Durkheim), these definitions are called substantive definitions of religion; what religion is. In religions there are specific functions and rules each member must follow these are the functional definitions of religion; what religion does in society. Each of these definitions contribute to whether religion is either a conservative force or a radical force. Does religion discourage social change and maintains things the way they are?
Weber on the Spirit of Capitalism and its Questionable Utility to Society Weber, in his book, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, aims to examine the motivations as well as the events behind the formation of the spirit of capitalism. The development of the spirit of capitalism, as described by Weber, can be understood as a facet of the development of economic rationalism1. At the same time, he believes that the ‘Protestant Ethic’ was vital for the perpetuation of the capitalist spirit. However, a problem arises because the ‘Protestant Ethic’ - or any religious/fanatic basis for that matter – transcends (or ignores) rational thought. His task, therefore, is to identify the roots of the spirit of capitalism with respect to the Protestant Ethic.