Therefore as w hole the functionalist theory sees religion as a positive thing and believes that it benefits society as w hole. The Marxist view of religion, however seems to think different.
Marx believes that religion is an illusion which eases the pain produced by exploition and oppression. They believe that it is a series of myths that justify the subordination of the lower classes and the domination of the ruling class. Marx argued that religion serves the interests of the dominant class and was infact detrimental to serving the interests of the capitalist class. In Marx's words, 'Religion is the sigh of the opressed creature, the sentiment of a heartless world and the soul of soulless conditions.
Marx believes that religion dulls the pain of oppression in four different ways. Firstly is promises a paradise of eternal bliss in life after death. If offers justice in the afterlife. Engels says that the appeal of christianity to the oppressed class lies in its promise of 'salvation from bondage and misery' in the afterlife. The christian view of heaven can make life on earth more bearable by giving people something to look forwards to.
The second way is that some religions make a virtue of the suffering produced by oppression. In particular, those who bear the deprivations of poverty with dignity will be rewarded for their virtue. This view is contained in the well known biblical quotation, 'It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.' Religion therefore makes poverty more tolerable by offering a reward and promising compensation for injustice in the afterlife.
Thirdly, religion can offer the hope of supernatural intervention to solve the problems on earth. Members of religious groups such as Jehovah's Witnesses live in anticipation of the day when the supernatural powers will descend from on high and create heaven on earth.
Finally religion often justifies the social order and a person's position within it. God can be seen creating and ordaining the social structure, as in the following verse from the hymn 'All things bright and beautiful': The rich man at his castle, the poor man at his gate, god made them high and lowly, and ordered their estate. In this way social arrangements appear inevitable. This can help those at the bottom of the social stratification system to come to terms with their situation.
Religion also acts as a means of social control. From a Marxist viewpoint religion does not just cushion the effects of oppression. It acts as a means of social control by maintaining the existing system of exploitation and reinforcing class relationship. By making hard lives bearable, religion tends to discourage people from attempting to change their situation. By offering an illusion of hope in a hopeless situation it prevents thoughts of overthrowing the system. It also helps to produce a false consciousness that blinds members of the subject class to their true situation and their real interests. In this way it diverts people's attention from the real source of their oppression and so helps to maintain ruling-class power.
The Marxist and functionalist ideas are comparable but are more contrasting against one another.
They have some basic principles which are quite similar to one another, both look at religion, and see it affecting the whole of society. They both see religion as a force of social control, the minority controlling the minority. The Marxists as well as the feminists believe that religion is structural, and see it as a conservative force, which prevents change, and keeps traditional and set values alive.
They both have the same criticisms too, when it comes to methodological weaknesses. Neither has investigated the impact of secularisation on the role of religion. Media now plays a demanding role in society, and both perspectives ignore these facts, and therefore are not as up to date with the changes that are happening in society as they should be. Neither the Marxists nor the Functionalists look closely at particular beliefs that different religious groups have, without doing this they can't see how the different religious groups change society, as they all have very different beliefs and system so will affect society in much different ways. Functionalists also have their own problems which Marxists do not have as far as methodological problems occur, Durkheim uses a small scale study, and uses secondary data this therefore could not be valid. Functionalists also ignore the fact that conflict is caused through religion (e.g. Northern Ireland, India etc) meaning that their methodology is not as accurate as they would hope for it to be.
They both believe religion helps maintain society's status quo, Functionalists see this as a positive role, promoting value consensus and social stability, meaning that no conflict is caused. However Marxists see this as a negative role as the working class are then oppressed by the hierarchal religious groups (the ruling class). Marx himself stated that "Religion is the Opium of the people", meaning that religion dulls the pain of the oppression on the working class. Promising that everyone will have the richness's of the World in aftermath, and that it is better to be poor, hence the monks and other religious people giving everything they own up.
Functionalists see religion as performing four positive functions, promoting value consensus, a set of values which everyone will follow and keep to ( e.g. the Ten Commandments in Christianity), Social solidarity, a sense of belonging to something bigger than yourself, helps integrate pole into society, and as Malinowski states religion provides comfort for people in times of crises for example after death, shown by the fact that the majority of funerals in Britain are religious, and provides an explanation of events to people, providing a meaning to people, which also provides comfort. This was shown in the aftermath of September the 11th where sales of Bibles and church attendance rose dramatically. Both of these examples show how religion still has a massive role to play as far as comfort, and support is needed.
Parsons, a Functionalist, stated that religion legitimises the norms, values and laws of society. Marxists see the fact that people especially the working class see society under this light, as oppressing, and detrimental to society.
The functionalists believe that society is brought together and promotes social integration, through people having the same beliefs. The Marxist views sharply contrast with this they believe that religion promotes inequality between people, through them being placed in a hierarchy.
On this case functionalists believe religion maintains society, everyone believing the same things, and therefore not rebelling against society, where as the Marxists think that religion causes conflict in society. Through such cases as Northern Ireland between the Protestants and Catholics. Functionalists believe that religion promotes a collective consciousness onto society; on the other hand Marxists believe that religion promotes a false consciousness on society. The Marxists think that religion promotes false consciousness through it being part of the ideological superstructure of society, which controls people through their minds. This therefore means that they need to spend less money on things such as policing and have less trouble. The powerful can therefore keep their hold on society through religion as through false consciousness the poor are discouraged from seeing the reality of their lives and the oppression that is taking place. They do this by legitimising the existing social order, as they state it is God given e.g. the Caste System.
Functionalists believe that religion is a positive force on society and individuals within society; however Marxists argue that this is not the case and religion acts on behalf of Capitalism, and the dominant ruling class and plays a negative role in enabling them to exploit the working class. Stating that this is the correct way to act, this can be shown in many religions, for example the Muslims and the caste system, and in Christianity.
Marxists argue that religion is a tool of social control, and legitimates the Capitalism system, again promoting false conciseness. On the other side Functionalist will argue the case that religion keeps society stable. For example Durkheim states that religion has value consensus which helps to integrates everyone tint societies, making them feel as if they belong, and therefore leading to social solidarity.
Both Marxists and Functionalists (Durkhiem) believed and acknowledged that religion would decline in its importance in relation to society. However as the Functionalists believed nothing could take the pace that religion had in society, and the influence that it could impact, the Marxists saw this in a different light and believed that the media would take religions place in society, having a greater impact on society than one single religion ever had done in the past.
The Functionalist and Marxist perspectives on religion contrast greatly, and are not really comparable. They do have similar view points in some instance but normally these take different stances. Their main comparisons lie in their methodological weaknesses.
