Marxists and Functionalists agree with the purpose of religion being a conservative force. Marx and Durkheim share the assumption that religion was a product of society and that it is a conservative force. They both agree that religion is in the interest of the ruling class. The evidence that supports the marxist perspective is that the church of england has traditionally been seen as the 'conservative party at prayer' . Evidence that criticises the marxist perspective states that there are many instances where religious leaders or movements have challenged the established order and help promote change.
Throughout Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America, he depicts the realities of religion in democracies, while illustrating the importance of Religion in the continued success of democracies. He also states that for a number of reasons, and not unlike all other forms of government, there are dangers. He points out the importance of religion by displaying how it aids the avoidance of these dangers and, the sustained prosperity of democracy. To first determine the importance of religion in democracies, you must first determine its dangers. The first of these dangers is susceptibility of Americans to extreme individualism, and isolation from the community.
Sacred objects differ from religion to religion, but they all serve the same primary function and that is to unite the believers into a collective and give them a sense of belonging, and to also create social harmony. However, Postmodernists such as Stjepan Mestrovic argue that Durkheim’s theory cannot be applied to modern society due to the increasing diversity that has split the collective consciousness, so now there is no longer one shared value system for religion to reinforce, and so it cannot create social harmony. Bronislaw Malinowski, another functionalist, agrees with Durkheim’s theory that religion promotes social solidarity and social harmony. But, he believes that it does so by performing psychological functions for individuals, like helping them cope with mental stress that may undermine social solidarity. Malinowski identifies two situations where religion performs this role, one of them being times of a life crisis.
Masserman at heart agrees with Freud’s argument that religion is an illusion humans hold onto, but he makes a key distinction in saying that this illusion is necessary for the well doing of human beings, “they are substitutive or compensatory beliefs, quite necessary to make human life at all livable” [Herberg 177]. Having set up Masserman’s ideas, Herberg is now able to explain with key distinction what the ideas of Masserman, which he calls the idea of ‘Natural Religion’, really are and why they are different then his ideas of true faith, of ‘Biblical Faith’. Herberg calls Masserman’s ideas one of ‘Natural Religion’. Herberg best explains this as “Sinful man…needs God and searches for him….but the God he finds is the God he constructs-if not with his hands than with his heart and mind- to suite his purposes” [Herberg 180,181]. Herberg
Catholics, he found, preferred to master their crafts. He accounted this disparity between occupations practitioners of said religions to the religious atmosphere and the ethics of their community. This changed occurred during the reformation in which there was a switch in the assurance of salvation for followers. In the absence of such assurances from religious authority, Weber argued, that Protestants began to search for extrinsic indications of salvation. Calvinism doctrine decreed predestination for its
Functionalists would argue that this is a function of religion in terms of primary socialisation i.e. learning right from wrong and not stealing or lying and having good morals. This is one argument against that science has become the main ideology now. However, conflict theories such as Marxism would argue that religion in primary socialisation is teaching working class a concept called ‘false class consciousness’, by this I mean making the working class accept the fact that they are lower and that the norms and values that they learn such as respect for others and meritocracy is just in the favour of the bourgeoisie/ ruling class. Therefore, they would agree with science and believe
He talks about our consciences, both authoritarian and humanistic. He even goes into detail about why it’s better to Garra 2 obey out of love then out of fear. Erich also states that “For centuries, obedience was insisted as a virtue, and disobedience was insisted as a vice.”(Fromm 683). This statement implies that obeying was the right thing to do, and disobeying was the wrong thing to do. He even uses religion and terms that deal with religion throughout his article for more evidence.
Danielle Rassi Mr. Battersby APUSH 11 September 2011 DBQ 1: The Influence of Puritan Values The Puritans were a diverse group of people who stood for religious purity. They believed that the English Reformation had not gone far enough in disposing similarities with the Church of Rome, such as hierarchy. Throughout the 1630s to the 1660s the Puritan’s valued religion and their beliefs were displayed in their life style, from the layout of their church centered town to their idea of salvation. Despite the religious rules, “brethren” community, and Puritan work ethic that influenced their social way of life and produced economic success in businesses, their utopian government fell apart at the rise of conflict between religious and profit motives as well as the clash of opposing ideas to their Puritan political system. The social structure of the New England Puritans was a brotherhood.
Functionalists, such as Durkheim, see religion to be a positive thing as it reinforces norms and values. There are four factors that contribute to Durkheim’s theory of religion - The Sacred and The Profane, Collective Conscience, Cognitive functions of religion and Totemism. When taking into account the inclusive definition of religion, football can be classed as religion. According to Durkheim, religion does not have to refer to God or spiritual beings, or a life after death. This is because Durkheim believed that some religions, including Theravada Buddhism, lack those supernatural features.
This is often thought to involve a belief in a god or gods, but this is not the case in all religious beliefs. The central meaning of ‘religion’ is, in fact, simply the way in which shared beliefs establish regulations, rules or bonds of obligation among the members of a community. This essay is going to highlight some of the ways in which religion serves in the interests of the powerful in society. Durkheim argues that the main function of religion is to promote social stability because when people have the same beliefs, they often have the same norms and values. However, Karl Marx argues that religion the opiate of the masses therefore it distracts the attention from the possibility of taking action to improve the social world by making false promises about the happy and satisfying life after death in the next world, which in turn gives the rich and powerful the ability to oppress the working class without guilt.