Essay:
Critically compare Functionalist and Marxist theories of religion
Religion beliefs of one sort or another are present in every known society but their variety seems to be endless and it is therefore difficult to produce a broad definition. Two main approaches that look at religion can be used though and these are the Marxist and Functionalist theories. All definitions emphasize certain aspects of religion and exclude others. Functional definitions tend to be too inclusive – it is too easy to qualify as a religion; while substantive ones tend to be too exclusive – it is too difficult to qualify as a religion. Marxism and functionalism are generally seen as fundamental opposites. They do have some similarities but there are generally very clear differences between the two approaches, which is why they must be looked at and compared in closer detail…
Marxism provides an alternative theory of religion to Functionalist writers such as Comte and Durkheim. In this respect, Marx's basic arguments can be considered as criticisms of Functionalist theories. The central theme of Marx's analysis of religion is that of ideology. In this respect, creligion is considered in terms of its status as a belief system (ideological framework) that plays a part in the way in which people see the social world and their position in that world. However, unlike most sociologists, Marx took a very determined view in relation to the way in which he argued that we should analyse religions. For Marx, religious beliefs represented a significant way in which people were oppressed and exploited within society. For this reason, Marx saw religion not just as an ideology, but an ideology that was incorrect
