Technology has become more advanced recently and has therefore allowed scientists to discover theories which can prove against religion. This has enhanced secularisation. Also, technology has helped the evolution of new religions due to factors such as the internet. People can learn and find out vast amounts of information about religions over the internet and therefore the information about new religions can spread quickly. Cults and sects are different religions that have been formed that are less included in everyday society. They are much more extreme than normal religions, and sects are not allowed to integrate with wider society. Its members are controlled and 100% commitment is needed from them. Technology has allowed these types of religions to be discovered easily and people are now more aware that they exist. This can also get more people to join these cults and sects because they can find a lot of information about them over the internet.
Functionalists and Marxists both believe that religion maintains the status quo and does not encourage social change; they say that changes in society shape religion. The functionalist view of religion is that it helps to keep society running and religion depends on societies needs. They believe in a collective conscience where people have shared values. Durkheim says that each religion has symbols which are important to them. The Australian aborigines have totem poles which they worship; these are sacred and important to their religion. Malinowski agrees with Durkheim and says that religion reinforces social norms and values. Yet he also believes that religion is only functional in specific areas of life, for example in times of need or tragedy religion provides people with comfort.
However there are some criticisms to the functionalist view of religion and how it doesn’t bring about social change. Religion can have a negative affect on societies and can be dysfunctional, rather than binding people together it can cause conflict. Also the majority of the functionalist view is based on the idea that society has one religion, but nowadays most societies are multi-cultural which again shows how society has changed.
Marxists believe that religion is the ‘opium of the people’ and that it dulls the pain of oppression of living in a capitalist society. They also say that it justifies social positions and actions. Religion is often seen as a conservative force, depending on the interpretation given to the word conservative. Functionalists and Marxists interpret conservative to mean want to stay traditional and not change too much. There are also criticisms of the Marxist perspective in the fact that they completely ignore secularization, surely the ideological power of religion is undermined by the fact that fewer than 10% of people attend church. They neglect the social factors which help to create and sustain religion, society, culture, and socialisation might create the need for religion rather than universal human desires.
Individuals and small groups of religious people can bring about social change. The interactionist Max Weber disagreed with functionalist and Marxist. He used the religious group ‘Calvinists’ to explain this theory. Calvinists were a protestant group who emerged in the 17th century and believed in predestination. According to them, your destiny or fate was fixed in advance- you were either damned or saved and there was nothing you or any religious figure could do to improve your chances of going to heaven. However it was believed that any form of social activity was of religious significance, material success that arose from hard work and an ascetic life would demonstrates God’s favour, therefore your ultimate destiny- a place in heaven. Weber argued that these ideas helped western economic development through the industrial revolution and capitalism. Many of the early entrepreneurs were Calvinists, their obsessive work ethic and self discipline, inspired by a desire to serve god meant they re-invested rather than spent their profits. Such attitudes were ideal for the development of industrial capitalism.
Neo Marxists argue that ruling class domination is actually more effective if its members are not directly involved in cultural institutions such as religion. They recognise the active role that may be played by religion in effecting revolutionary social change. They call this apparent independence of cultural institutions relative autonomy. Otto Maduro also argued for the relative autonomy of religion, suggesting that in situations where there is no other outlet for grievances such as in Latin America, the clergy can provide guidance for the oppressed in their struggle with dominant groups. Religious fundamentalists can also bring about social change. Fundamentalists are extremists which interpret their holy book literally. They are concerned about the changing society which challenge the authority of god and therefore try and resurrect traditional morals and values. An example of a group of religious fundamentalists who have brought about social change are Islamic fundamentalists who caused the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001. This has brought about changes in society because security is much stricter now and other Islamic people may be judged badly due to this.
Nowadays we live in a multi-cultural society and social change is expected to occur. Living in a multi-cultural society has brought many religions together and therefore society has changed because people have had to learn to respect each others beliefs. This sometimes causes conflict which goes against the functionalist and Marxist belief that religion maintains the status quo, because people will disagree with each other and not have the same morals. Therefore it is true that religion can bring about social change, and social change can also have an affect on religion.