By using religion, the collective conscience is reinforced.
Durkheim used Totemism as an example for a society. This society is divided into clans and each member is totally devoted to its clan. Each clan has a totem, a statue that they use to represent each clan. When they worship this, it represents God and society. It is like a flag or an emblem that represents our country.
Therefore by worshipping the totem, Durkheim concluded that they are worshipping their God but they are really worshipping their society.
However some say that Totemism is not a real religion. The idea that Durkheim portrays is only relevant to smaller, non-literate societies. Therefore they are not relevant to modern societies such as ours and cannot be generalised.
Also people do not set out to become part of a society, they believe in the god and then they are brought into the society by their beliefs.
Even thought this argument is interesting, it is not a proof. Durkheim has failed in attempting to prove the non-existence of God.
Freud suggested later that religious beliefs are nothing more than “illusions, fulfilments of the oldest strongest and most insistent wishes of mankind.”
In foreign societies, people use religion as a sort of protection against their fears, e.g. flood, fire, death etc and religious beliefs help them stay controlled. By worshipping gods they feel they can control the forces. They give them names, so they can talk to them and worship them. This is an attempt to control the rain and the thunder.
Therefore Freud suggested that God is an invention of the human mind.
Associated with Freud is the Oedipus complex, where sons banded together to attempt to kill their fathers to gain the love of their mothers. They feel guilty and they realise they cannot all succeed their father. By feeling guilt they have the urge to worship an all-powerful father figure, known as God. They also feel love and awe, as well as guilt before this all-powerful God. Freud has suggested we need to rid ourselves of this “psychological crutch.” And see the world as it really is.
There are many rejections of Freud’s description of pre-history, which he took from Darwin. Even though the Oedipus complex is interesting it does seem to be the reason for our actions. In relation to this point there is no empirical evidence that this is the case, it is just Freud’s interpretation.
This again is not a proof, but again interesting.
b) Freud presents an interesting argument however it is greatly flawed. First and foremost, it lacks any empirical evidence. So straight away it cannot be a proof as there is no indication that it is a factual theory. However many do agree with Freud when he has made some claims.
The Oedipus complex does seem a little too simplistic and many believe that this is not a substantial verification that this is why men behave the way they do. There is no factual evidence that this is the basis for our behaviour. It is just one interpretation of the information.
John Hick Has suggested that inadvertently Freud has compiled an argument as evidence for Gods existence with his idea of this all-powerful father figure.
It is a possibility that God has wanted to create this idea in the human mind. He wanted us to think of him as an all-powerful father figure.
Hick argues that it is not surprising that humans should think of God as being a powerful, loving father figure who has a wonderful relationship with his children.
However many have agreed with Freud when he has suggested Religion has the quality of fantasy thinking. So it is our minds that have created this wonderful being.
In conclusion The Freudian theory may be true however it has not yet been shown to be so.
