Last but not least, I would like to give examples and give my point of view on the word sociology, such as what does it mean to me! First, I would like to define and explain what sociology means to me! Sociology explores people and society. It examines our social institutions; our families, the state and social relationships like gender and ethnicity, to help make sense of how we both see and interpret our rapidly changing world. Sociology examines how our behavior individually and in groups is influenced by social processes and what that means.
Emile Durkheim and Karl Marx are two very well known sociologists whose opinions on religion differ a great deal. Durkheim put great importance on the solidifying nature of religion; it’s ability to create rituals, which rely on symbols and in turn form social facts. Marx, on the other hand, has one of the most famous quotes regarding religion, stating that it is the ‘opium for the masses’. This only begins to tell us where he stands on the idea of religion in sociology. Marx focuses more on the idea that religion is one of those social institutions, which are dependent upon the material and economic sources and resources in a given society.
Calvinists had several distinctive beliefs such as predestination (where god had predetermined whether a soul will be saved or not and there is nothing a person can do to change this), devine transcendence (no individual can claim to know god’s ill, which made people feel inner loneliness), and asceticism, self-discipline and self-denial were required by Calvinist’s and this prepared them for a life under capitalism. Vocation or calling, Calvinist’s introduced the idea of this worldly asceticism, which meant constant methodical work in occupation and was a religious duty. Again preparing people of life under capitalism as it requires hard work. Weber did not say that Calvinism was the cause of modern capitalism, but that it was one of the causes. Bruce was interested in the relationship between religion and social change whereby he compared two examples of religiously inspired protests movements in the USA - the civil rights movement and the new Christian right.
It supported the idea of laissez-faire policies of which the government should not regulate the marketplace or attempt social reform. Where as Social Gospel addressed excesses of industrialization and urbanization. Since it had a profound impact on churches and nonprofit organizations, it believed that Christians should work to improve social conditions for the poor, and the sick. Social Gospel taught its followers that it is a person's duty to help others in need. Inspired by the miracles of Jesus Christ, they believed that the Kingdom of God would appear on earth, and that the faithful should work to achieve it.
Through his analyses of social action, he devised the theory of rationalization. In his work, Weber interprets rationalization as the governing of social interaction and institutions by systematic and calculable rules. He applied this theory to his study of Western society and his interpretation of the actions and tendencies that were most prevalent at the time. In his work The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, Weber argued that rational action, in pursuit of religious goals and a sacred end, is what determined practical economic affairs and ultimately developed capitalism. He can be compared to Karl Marx with the analyzes of capitalism and its instability; though Weber rejects Marx’s historical materialism theory and takes a religious approach, both sociologist conclude society is moving towards an unfit way of life.
5) The second core concept is the notion of free grace as opposed to a doctrine of works for the salvation of man, or in other words the earning of salvation. (Puritanism par. 2) The core beliefs of Puritans are illustrated well in the sermon of Jonathan Edwards’s, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.” In Jonathan Edwards sermon, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” the reader is bombarded with the concepts and beliefs of the Puritans. The first instance of this has to do with
The philosopher Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) was one of the early founders of existentialism. Although Kierkegaard was a devout Christian, he rejected the Christian Church due to its legalistic nature and the false relationship that people were receiving with God as a result. Kierkegaard believed that the key relationship of an individual was with God. He argued that God has given people freedom to make their own decisions and therefore our decisions are not determined. He thought that our existence is not something determined rationally or part of an on-going process but that it is something specific which is created through the choices we make.
Henry VIII, having earned the title “Defender of Faith” for a pinning response to Luther’s attacks on the sacraments, had no interest in religious reform, whereas Martin Luther did. Henry’s motive was that of a personal matter only wanting his way concerning his divorce, while Martin Luther used his personal motive of reforming the church and making it widespread with his beliefs. One of Martin Luther’s
After this encounter Paul became a very significant individual who used letters and his writing to powerfully contribute to towards the development of Christianity. Christianity began as a sect out of Judaism and as a follower individuals believed strictly in the laws of Mosses which included dietary restrictions and the act of circumcision. Those that were non Christian Jews (Gentiles) were viewed as unclean and of inferior quality. Paul challenged the ideas of Judaism in aim to veer Christianity away from Gods laws and political goals, highlighting Jesus as a figure of universal salvation. “The fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace patience, kindness, goodness, fullfulness, gentleness and self-control.
It was a term coined by one of the founding fathers of classical sociology Comte and it involves: “Knowledge that is disciplined, empirical and scientific free from religious or political bias.” On the other hand as society and the early science of sociology evolved a different approach was seen by many to be the way forward. This anti-positivist thinking or interpretist approach believes that society cannot be studied as a science; this methodological anti-positivism proposed the theory of the human in society as an individual and thus research be directed to human cultural norms, values and symbols. The interpretist will take a more subjective approach were as the positivist tries to look at society objectively. Let us now look to compare and contrast positivism with an interpretist approach. Positivists are of the opinion that society can be studied using a scientific approach comparable to the way scientists study the natural world.