- Used data from non-literate societies to develop his theories
- Sees religion as reinforcing social norms & values – like Durkheim
- When you need something to help you cope with what you don’t understand
- People turn to prayer/ God if they have to deal with something challenging - Prayer helps fear to be coped with more easily
- Helps to deal with life crises (birth/marriage/death)
- Religious belief & ritual give meaning to these uncertainties – create bonds of support between individuals
-
Eg. Funerals –help to re-integrate the social group which is threatened by the death of a member
Weddings – situation where a sacred feeling is given to challenge relationship
- Rituals reduce anxiety by providing confidence & a feeling of control
- Economic insecurity – religious ritual is often associated with threats to economic survival
- His argument – religion promotes social solidarity by dealing with situations of emotional stress that threaten the stability of society
- Religion was primarily a response to the psychological pressures on individuals & society as a result of anxiety & tension
Criticisms
- Exaggerates importance of religious rituals in helping people cope with stress & uncertainty
- A particular function/effect of religion sometimes has been mistaken for a feature of religion in general
Talcott Parsons
- Argued that human actions directed & controlled by norms provided by the social system
- Norms which direct action are affected by the values & beliefs of the cultural system
Eg. Norms in Western society are expressions of the value of materialism
- Religion’s part of the cultural system
- Religious beliefs provide guidelines for human action & standards
- 10 commandments provide the basis for many social norms in Christian societies
- Religion acts a way to generate social solidarity & stability
- Life doesn’t always follow smooth patterns – religion maintains social stability by relieving the tension & frustration that could disrupt social order
- Religion answers “man’s questions about himself & the world he lives in”
- ‘Makes sense’ of all experiences, no matter how meaningless/contradictory they appear
- Provides meaning to events that people don’t expect, or find frustrating
- Allows intellectual/emotional adjustment
- Religion’s a major source of meaning in a society – it offers answers to major questions of life & death
- Like Malinowski he saw religion as dealing with problems that could disrupt social life
- By saying ‘Jesus rose again; you’ll see him in heaven’ helps people to go on and get on with their lives after a death etc.
- It helps humans make sense of all experiences – can cope with horrible/horrendous situations
- Stops people feeling angry towards others & upsetting society
- Apparent injustices of life can make life appear meaningless
- Core values in society are given additional force & power because they’re part of religious meaning
- Values are given sacred support so they’re not just the norms & values of society, they’re legitimated by reference to a higher being/force
- This contributes to the maintenance of consensus in society
- Parsons has argued that it’s more a case of religion losing some of it’s previous functions but retaining & specialising in a reduced range of social functions
Criticisms
- Ignores dysfunctional aspects – emphasised on positive
- Ignores instances where religion maybe disruptive/divisive
- Gives little consideration to hostility between religious groups in the same society
- Conflict sociologists would argue that there is no consensus in society – ‘core values’ are imposed by a ruling class
Marxist
- Want exploitation & alienation to be things of the past
- Production should be communally owned – no social classes
- People should fulfil & control their own destinies & work together for the common good
- An illusion which eases the pain produced by oppression & exploitation - distortion of reality
- Religion fulfils a number of functions for a ruling class – forms part of the system of social control which keeps subordinate classes in their place – justifies social inequality & offers the prospect of a better life hereafter (if they don’t challenge the existing social order)
- Religion is a money making scheme
- Makes w/c stay w/c & low in society
- W/c are meant to respect the people that exploit them
Opium of the people
“Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature” Marx (1963)
- Religion dulls the pain produced by oppression & makes life more bearable
- It ‘drugs’ those who occupied lowly places in society by offering what Marx saw as the illusion of happiness after death
- It helps the poor to accept their position, helping them deal to deal with the present life
- Also serves the interests of ruling class because those who accept existing inequality in the hope of better things to come are less likely to challenge the status quo
- Lenin “Religion is a kind of spiritual gin in which the slaves of capital drown their human shape & their claims to any decent life”
- It dulls the pain by:
1. Promising paradise – eternal bliss in after life. Christian view of heaven makes life on earth more bearable; something to look forward to
2. Some religions make a virtue of the suffering produced by oppression. Makes poverty more tolerable by offering rewards for suffering and compensation for injustice
3. Offers the hope of supernatural intervention to solve problems
4. Justifies the social order & persons position in it – makes life more bearable by encouraging people to accept their situation & status
Criticisms
- Secularisation may mean that religion doesn’t function as an ‘opiate’ to the same extent as it may have in the past (maybe the mass media or another social institution is carrying out the role of an ‘opiate’ instead)
- How far religion can be seen as the ‘opiate of the masses’ in contemporary society depends on a number of issues.
Social control
- Doesn’t just cushion effects of oppression but also instrument of that oppression
- Keeps people in their place by making unsatisfactory lives bearable
- Discourages people trying to change their situation
- Diverts people’s attention from real source of their oppression – helps maintain ruling class power
- Legitimates inequality
- Religious teaching justifies inequality, legitimating its existence/accepting its inevitability
- C19th the notion of ‘the rich man at his castle, the poor man at his gate, He (God) made them high or lowly, He ordered his estate’
- Any challenge to the existing social order is therefore not simply a challenge to some secular authority, but to one which is sanctioned by God
- The Caste System of India was justified by Hindu beliefs
- People were treated horrifically but they used religion to justify their dominance/power
-
Kings like Henry 2nd and James 1st believed in the divine right of kings – God chose them so they had the right to do anything
- Apartheid: System which believed that all Native S.Africans should move to bad land & could be killed/arrested if they were found off that land.
- 2 tier system = black & white
- As a result England stopped trading with S.Africa – even banned them from the Olympics
- Huddleson made it a world issue & got the world to force it to end
- Religion doesn’t always help because it was the Arch Bishop that started by the Apartheid movement
Criticisms
- Religion doesn’t always legitimate power
- Sometimes can provide an impetus of change
- Marx doesn’t explain the existence of religion
- The notion of a ‘false consciousness’ to which religion contributes is Marx was of explaining why the oppressed don’t perceive & do something about their situation
- It’s impossible to prove/disprove – how do we know when awareness is correct/incorrect?
- Certainly those who hold religious beliefs don’t think of them in these terms & it’s a major value judgement to claim that this is an example of ‘false consciousness’
Comparison
- Marxists & functionalists view religion as a v.important force in society but for v.different reasons
-
Funtionalism sees religion as a source of social unity & cohesion
-
Marxists analysis identifies religion as a social control mechanism not serving the interests of the whole of society – just ruling class
Fundamental difference – stems from the different assumptions made by the 2 approaches about the nature of society
Religion & social change
Functionalism
- Religion operates in a conservative manner – reinforces & reflects to value consensus in society
- Fulfils the function of creating social unity & acts to preserve existing social arrangements
- Prevents any rapid social changes which might threaten status quo
- Seen as being a positive benefit to society as it prevents disorder & social breakdown
Marxism
- Religion inhibits change not for the benefit of society as a whole but in order to protect the interests of a ruling class
- As an ‘opiate’ religion prevents the oppressed from being fully aware of their real circumstances
- This limits the possibility of any challenge to the authority of the ruling class
- There’s more similarity between the 2 approaches over the issue of the relationship between religion & social change
- Both agree that religion is a change inhibiting force in society although they reach this similar conclusion via very different theoretical routes
-
Functionalists – supernatural beliefs have no reality
Marxists – religion serves to legitimate power & advantage enjoyed by the privileged
-
Functionalists – religion has a purpose
Marxists – this hides the real basis of power/exploitation. Religion alienates people from their true selves yet it’s the means by which they can by delusion – escape from suffering/oppression
- Both agree that religion originated from social factors & once formed it’s importance rose above social/economic matters to great its supernatural significance
- Therefore religion’s important for social control because it keeps people in their place by…
- distorting reality
- creating ‘class consciousness’ therefore justifying different standards
- diverting attention away from the real cause of suffering
- helping the rich to accept/justify their own privileged position
Defining Religion
Functionalism
- Durkheim defined religion fairly broadly – applying ‘inclusivist’ definition accepting as ‘religious’ anything which is considered to be sacred by members of a society
- This can be taken to include belief systems other than those which are generally accepted as being truly ‘religious’, including political beliefs, nationalism and worship of individual figures
- Parsons saw religion as being a particular set of beliefs within the overall cultural sub-system
Marxism
- Religion as something that’s sacred by society
- Religious ideas aren’t ‘true’ they’re the product of society, an ideology that’s used to control subordinate classes
Future of religion
Functionalism
- Some have identified a process of secularisation which might lead to the extinction of religion in modern industrial society
- Parsons has argued that it’s more a case of religion losing some of it’s previous functions but retaining & specialising in a reduced range of social functions
- Religion can be seen to have a role in the future, continuing to provide a set of core moral values
Marxism
- Clear & definite view of what was likely to happen
- Convinced that the role of religion as a means of defence of ruling class interests
- Once the ruling class had been moved & a socialist society introduced then the need for religion would disappear
- Religion no longer having any social purpose – will wither and die
Differences
-
Functionalists say it brings society closer
Marxists say it keeps them apart due to w/c exploitation
-
Functionalists believe rituals are important to reinforce social solidarity
Marxists say it’s just a money making scheme
Role of religion in society
Functionalism
- Religion forms part of the value consensus in society
- Religion operates for the general good in society
- Religion benefits individuals as well
- DURKHEIM: reinforces the ‘collective conscience’, sacred power gives credibility to common values, duties & obligations; it’s a source of social cohesion & integration; binds individuals together
- MALINOWSKI: a source of support & directions as individuals/societies tried to cope with life-threatening events. Many are beyond human control so they focus on the supernatural explanation
- PARSONS: establishes general moral guidelines & is part of the process of socialising individuals into understanding & accepting the pattern of norms within a culture
Marxism
- Religion acts in the interests of ruling class
- Religion is an ‘opiate’ dulling the pain of oppression in an exploitive society
- Religion distorts reality – creating a ‘false consciousness’ in subordinate classes
- Suffering created by an unequal society are justified by religion masking its real cause & preventing people from seeing ways to change society
- Religion justifies the social system, representing it as the creation of some all-powerful supernatural being whose authority of course, would be foolish & wrong to challenge
- Religion is an important means of social control in class-based societies
Materialist theory
Bryan S. Turner
- 1983 follows Marx
- Argues religion rises from a material base – relates to the physical & economic aspects of life
- Unlike Marx, he doesn’t believe that religion has a universal role in society nor that it’s an important past of ruling-class ideological control
- Says religion isn’t as important for peasants as feudal lords – peasants just wanted to survive
- Ruling class needed to maintain dominance – without religion this was hard
- Religion’s just an ‘optional extra’ in modern societies – church accepts divorce & illegitimacy
Neo - Marxist
- Some modern Marxists have argued that religion doesn’t always reflect the dominant ideology of a ruling class
- Sometimes it can be a focus for resistance to exploitation
- Society was v.different when Marx was around
- They say that society is still split up but it’s a lot more subtle
- Religion can be used as revolutionary force
- Still focus on classes – w/c use religion to justify rebellious behaviour
- Not just used by the elite – used by oppressed groups to overthrow & challenge systems
- Eg. Catholics in Ireland against English govt.
Gramsci
- Social superstructure is more independent of the economic base than Marx claimed
- Religion’s not as tightly tied to the wished of the ruling class & maybe a vehicle for w/c liberation
Otto Maduro
- Accepts many aspects of Marx’s analysis of religion but places greater emphasis on the idea that religion has some independence or ‘relative autonomy’, from the economic system of the bourgeois
- Denies religion is a conservative force
- “Religion isn’t necessarily a functional, reproductive or conservative factor in society; it often is one of the main (sometimes only) available channel to bring about social revolution.”
- Religion can be revolutionary - Priests can actually activate the population
- In developing countries where the church is the dominant source of ideas – religion can be liberating
- Eg. Catholic church in Poland & El Salvador, Anglican church in S.Africa
- Liberation Theology was a radical version of Catholicism which fuelled several resistance movements in Latin America
- Church is a political institution – not neutral in political affairs
- Up until recently, Catholicism support the bourgeoisie & right-wing dictatorships
- Maduro believes that members of the clergy can develop revolutionary potential where oppressed members of population have no outlet for their grievances
- They pressurise priests to take up their cause & theological disagreements of a religion that are critical of the rich & powerful
Engels
Roger O’Toole – “Beginning with the work of Engels, Marxists have undoubtedly recognised the active role that maybe played by religion in effecting revolutionary social change
- ‘On the History of Early Christianity’
- Compared some early Christian sects opposed to Roman Rule to communist and Socialist political movements
- He said “Christianity got hold of masses exactly as modern socialism does, under the shape of a variety of sects”
- Christianity originated as a way of coping with exploitation among oppressed groups
- It could become a source of resistance to the oppressors & become a force for change
Weber
- Religion provides people with a source of meaning – explains the world
- As people act on the basis of the meanings they hold, religion can be a force for social change as well reinforcing & justifying social & economic inequality
-
Weber examined the reasons for the development of capitalism in W.Europe from the C16th
- He asked why Capitalism developed there & then – why not somewhere else at a different time?
- His historical analysis of other societies concluded that although most of the ingredients for Capitalism existed in other societies at other times
-
One element missing that was present from C16th in W.Europe, was a set of ideas that fitted the ideas of capitalism – rationality, profit motive, a work ethic, a free workforce etc.
-
This was provided in C16th in W.Europe by the rise of an alternative form of Christianity to Catholicism, Calvinism
- According to Weber, capitalism needed:
- A hard-working workforce
- A disciplined work
- Rational economic organisation
- Adherence to the profit motive
- Savings/investment
- Weber challenged Marx’s claim that religion reflects the economic base
- Instead it can change the economic base
Criticisms
- Protestantism pre-dated the development of capitalism – early forms of capitalism soon to have occurred in pre-Protestant Europe
- Using the new religion as a justification of their demands, not as a cause of capitalism
Feminism
There’ll never be gender equality in church as long as God is thought to be male.
Key concept: Patriarchy
- Religion helps maintain the dominant position of men in several ways:
- Men form the leadership elite in a religion
- Religious ritual often excludes women or relegates them to a minor role
- Religious belief & teachings legitimates female subordination
- Religious places women in subordinate social roles (family/motherhood)
- Religion often legitimates male-centred property ownership
Examples…
-
Witchcraft persecutions in middle ages: 1000s women executed as witches – invariably witches were associated with women
-
Abbott and Wallace argue that women as the traditional healers were targeted for persecution because they were a threat to the growth of male domination of medicine
-
Control over social roles of women – many religions specify many aspects of women’s role/ behaviour/ clothing/ place in worship/ child-bearing
-
Catholic doctrines restrict abortion/contraception etc. – channels women into family/motherhood based roles
-
Some interpretations of Islam place strong constraints on how woman appear in public
-
C of E only recently opened women to the opportunity of joining the clergy
Armstrong
(1993)
- In W.society & Middle East males were very dominant & aggressive
- Church therefore needed a patriarchal rationale to justify male dominance
- Male gods became dominant in Northern hemisphere & middle East
- Become more civilised – became monotheistic (one god) rather than polytheist (many gods)
|
Leads to disappearance of the “Godess” – only male images of gods
Davie
(1994)
- Men & women tend to regard God differently
- Women see him as loving & forgiving but men see God as powerful & controlling
-
Jewish prayer: “Blessed that I am not a woman…”
- Women born to serve men? Orthodox Jews believe so
- Christianity is also patriarchal
-
“For the glory of man” “mankind” “Wives be subject to your husbands”
- Female characters in the bible are in the old testament – Eve & Mary
- No woman apostils
- In Buddhism – males are dominant – women are seen as vulnerable & imperfect
Bird
(1999)
- In Catholicism, Priests are expected to be celibate
- Some aspects of Islam & Christianity are opposed to homosexuality
- Women are thought of as the corruptors of people who’ll tempt people sexually
Turner
(1993)
- This discipline to one’s sexuality (celibacy) is essential to religion
- Celibacy is linked to being closer to God
- Orthodox Jews & Catholics don’t allow female priests
- Woman have come to take orders in some denominations – more women priests
- Not until 1992 could a woman become a full priest but still some disapprove
Mary Daly
(1973 & 1978)
- Religion is a Patriarchal Myth – made up by men to suit men
- Especially Christianity
- By becoming monotheist & getting rid of woman images & goddesses
Simone de Beauvoir
(1953)
The Second Sex
- Marxist point of view
- Bible is a tool of oppression for lower classes & mainly women
- It’s for women who get their fulfilment through caring
- Other feminists say because men wrote the scriptures – it wasn’t a deliberate patriarchal drive, just in practice
- It’s allowed men to abuse their power
-
Eg. C14th if catholic women treated illness without practice they were treated as witches
- This resulted in a male dominated health care
- Up until 1950, when a woman got married she lost her job – now it’s equal opportunity
- Even now women aren’t generally the main income or they now change their job to suit family
- Not all religious organisations are equally oppressive to women
- They’re allowed to become rabbis if you’re a liberal Jew
- Sikh religion have recently campaigned for equality for women
- Buddhism also has a modern, equal approach to women
- All world religions have made some sort of step to treating women better
More Women go to Church
Muller & Hoffman
(1995)
- Women tend to have greater interest & commitment to religion
- Attend services more often – no matter what religion
- Different socialisation ]- why they adopt caring role
Different social roles ]
Greely
(1992)
- Before marriage, attitudes are similar
- After marriage, women tend to adopt this ‘caring’ role
- Assume greater responsibility for others welfare
- Could be linked to religion in terms of being responsible
Bruce
(1995)
- Membership to sects is similar to church attendance
- Ratio – for every man there’re 2 women (1:2)
- Could be because women are more likely to suffer deprivation than men
- This’ll make evangelical goals (going to heaven, getting God’s strength) more attractive
Many new ages emphasise ‘going back to nature’ – simple caring existence
They stress herbal remedies etc. women find these soothing in an aggressive world
Postmodernism
Key ideas:
- Postmodernism argues that the ‘old’ sociological search for grand objective explanations of social behaviour is pointless
- Suggest that there are no ‘meta-narratives’, no absolute truths
- Only values in society are the relative values
- Old certainties are lost, there’re now many ideologies to choose from, society is now more fractured
- There’s a move away from traditional forms of belief & behaviour
- People now select their lifestyle, beliefs, leisure etc.
- Also a strong emphasis on consumerism & also experience rather than the achievement of aims
Impact on religion:
- Religion is therefore unlikely to promote social cohesion that functionalist suggest
- It’s not going to operate in the way Marxists argue - more personal, more privatised – DIY/pick and mix
- People are more open to new ideas, perhaps explaining the growth of NRNs
- Nature of religion shifts according to the needs of people in different social contexts
- People & society has come to terms with the existence of many different ways to see the world
Criticisms:
- Habermas argues that postmodernism is a distraction from the great Enlightenment goal of using rational thought to uncover truths
- Postmodernism can disappear into a relativist abyss – nothing is definite, what’s the point of research?
- This view of post-modern society may be exaggerated/ may underestimate the continuing importance of traditional ways of thinking & of the impact of social forces such as social class & gender
