How do we account for religion - its origin, its development, and even its persistence in modern society? This is a question which has occupied many people in a variety of fields for quite a long time. At one point, the answers were framed in purely theological and religious terms, assuming the truth of Christian revelations and proceeding from there. In the 18th and 19th centuries, a more "naturalistic" approach developed. Instead of needing to believe in the truth of the religion, what was required was just the opposite: intellectual detachment and a suspension of belief. Three people who ended up doing just that were Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim and Max Weber. Marx studied philosophy in Berlin under William Hegel. Hegel's philosophy had a decisive influence upon Marx's own thinking and theories. According to Marx, religion is an expression of material realities and economic injustice. Thus, problems in religion are ultimately problems in society. Religion is not the disease, but merely a symptom. It is used by oppressors to make people feel better about the distress they experience due to being poor and exploited. This is the origin of his comment that religion is the "opium of the people." "People do not have an objective view of the world; they see it from the restricted point of view of their own positions."(p.35) At times I may seem to be focusing more on economic rather than religious theory, but that is because Marx's basic stance is that everything is always about economics. According to Marx, humans - even from their earliest beginnings - are not motivated by grand ideas but instead by material concerns, like the need to eat and survive. This is the basic premise of a materialist view of history. At the beginning, p... ... middle of paper ... ... wealth was taken as a sign by you and your neighbors that you were one of the Gods elect, thereby providing encouragement for people to acquire wealth. The Protestant ethic therefore provided religious sanctions that fostered a spirit of rigorous discipline, encouraging men to apply themselves rationally to acquire wealth. This naturalistic approach to religion represented a fundamental paradigm shift in how religion was to be viewed. Instead of requiring clergy in order to understand religion, the requirement became facts and information and research. Whether you agree with the evaluation of the social function of religion as Marx did, that religion was the "opium of the people", as Durkheim did that religion was what made moral society hold together, or with Weber's The Protestant ethic, it is obvious that religion played a key role in the development of society.
The fear of early twentieth century dystopian writers is the fear that people in general had in this era; what is the impact of communism or what the future of religion with evolution and Darwinism would be. The may concern was that if religion was obsolete, what would replace it as the moral compass of the people. One of the most important individuals of the early twentieth century Karl Marx had his own philosophy for a replacement. The role of religion in Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto is stated as,” But Communism abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality, instead of constituting them on a new basis…’" (Marx 19) That new bases he mentioned in the quote is the state, the new morale code that society must follow.
First, I want to identify who Marx and Nietzsche are and their critiques on religion. Karl
Emile Durkheim As An Idealist In "Elementary Forms Of The Religion Life" Durkheim's most important rationale in The Elementary Forms was to explain and clarify the generally primordial religious conviction identified by man. However, his focus as a consequence irk a number of outside connection for historians as his fundamental rationale went distinctly ahead of the modernization of an old culture for its own accord; quite the opposite, Durkheim's interest in The Division of Labor and Suicide, was eventually both contemporary as well as workable as he asserts that if prehistoric religion were taken as the topics of investigations, then it is for the reason that it apparently appears “to us better adapted than any other to lead to an understanding of the religious nature of man, that is to say, to show us an essential and permanent aspect of humanity”. Durkheim's doctrine studies that the society must abstain from reductionism and think about social phenomena- sui generis, disqualifying biologist or psychologist explanations; he focused concentration on the social-structural elements of mankind's social problems. Even though in his previous work Durkheim defined social facts by their constraint, massing his main part on the execution of the legal system, he was afterward moved to shift his views considerably. He then emphasized that those social facts and moral codes become potent guides and controls of behavior only to the extent that they become internalized in the cognizance of individuals, while persisting to subsist exclusively of individuals. This, compulsion is not a customary restraint of distant controls on individual will, but rather a moral commitment to conform to a rule. Durkheim attempted to study social facts not onl...
It is common knowledge that in the past religion and myths were just ways for societies to explain events and occurrences that citizens of ancient societies did not have enough advanced knowledge to understand. It was also used as a way to oppress others, as seen in the explanation of class order and royalty as God placing a person where they were meant to be and that there was nothing one could do about it, because who can go against God himself? Religion played an even bigger part than that though, being a large part of every person’s identity and something for a country and its people to unit over. But as society slowly aged, and governments were reorganized and re-structured, one can see a reduction in religion being a part of someone’s identity. It is hard to imagine being without an identity so it came as no surprise when, as the void left by religion was opened, people began to create an identity that had to do with different ideas and ideologies. More specifically, new political movements, ideas of nationalism, and change of social norms brought on by many writers and theorists such as Karl Marx, John Mill, and many others. The spread of such ideas was also helped by the spread of public education and rising literacy rates in western society.
Religion is a symbolic representation of society. The sociological approach to religious belief looks at how society behaves on a whole, to answer the question, “Why are people religious?” We express our participation in religious events through plays, acts of confession, religious dances, etc. To begin to understand why we have such term, let’s understand the common elements of religion. There are different types in which people believe in or follow and that is: animatism, animism, ancestral spirits, god and goddesses, and minor supernatural beings. Beyond these different elements, such one is to have religious leaders to follow.
Marx predicted that religion would disappear as a phenomenon of false (because there is no God, according to Marx), and churches will become museums. All see how the number of churches in the world increases, a church becoming the heavy believers. However, the council rejected Marx, and yet kept his not believing in God.
Marx saw religion as a tool for class oppression because of the conflict it provided for societies. According to Marx, “religion is the opium of the people” and “religion promotes stratification because it supports a hierarchy of people in Earth and the subordination of humankind to divine authority.” Marx believes that man makes religion, and not vice versa. He argues that religion is a mere product of man and is for people who have not won himself or has lost himself again. He calls for the banishment of religion stating that religion is just an illusion of happiness and the abolition of it is a demand for real happiness. Religion highlights social conditions and causes people to think and act the way religion teaches instead of having individuals act based on their own agency.
With so many religions out in the world today it only makes it harder for man to feel they are in the right religion. However, it would probably be a lot easier to follow Marx’s and Hume’s religious views where religion does not exist. Between both philosophers Marx’s is the hardest in critiquing religion since it discounts the belief of religion, claiming its poison for man. Hume’s doesn’t completely discard the idea of religion; just for the moment, religions have no cause and affect making it irrational. One can feel this idea can change is religion actually have a cause and effect. I feel by the time man finds the answer for religion, that same day I should find out what came first the chicken or egg?
Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim are considered the founding fathers of sociology and both had profound influence on the development of sociology. However, some may say that they differ dearly in their views about society. Although there are differences in outlooks between the two, one thing noticeable is Marx and Durkheim shared the same concern over society and its development. They were both, in particular concerned with the rise of the modern system of division of labour and the evolution of market society taking place in the domain of modern capitalism. Both approached these developments by introducing a theory of their own to shed light on the effects that modern capitalism had on solidarity and on society’s ability to reproduce itself. More so, to understand and solve the problems arose as the societies in which they lived moved from a pre-industrial to an industrial state. For Marx, one of the serious problems arose in this was what he termed alienation. On the other, for Durkheim it was what he called anomie. The purpose of this essay is to examine the underlying differences of these two notions and in hope that it may help us to better understand the different visions of society developed by these two great social thinkers. Firstly, we start off with Marx’s idea of alienation. Secondly, what anomie means to Durkheim. Then a comparison will be done on the two concepts, evaluating the similarities and differences between the two. Lastly, we will finally come to conclude how the concept of alienation differs from the concept of anomie.
The German thinker, Karl Marx (1818-1883), wanted to understand and explain the changes that occurred in society at the time of the Industrial Revolution in Europe. (ibid) In 1843 Marx met Engels in Paris. It marked the beginning of a lifelong of friendship and professional collaboration. In 1848 Marx and Engels published “The Communist Manifesto”. The Manifesto outlined the struggles between classes. From then onwards it has become apparent that Marx was not an economist. His theories are a combination of economics, history, sociology and politics. Marx moved to London in 1849 where he spent the rest of his life.
During the European industrialization, theorist Émile Durkheim was the first to analyze religion in terms of societal impact. Durkheim defined religion as a “unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things” (Keirns, N. et al, p. 337, 2012). In terms of society, Durkheim overall believed that religion is about community: It binds people together (social cohesion), promotes behavior consistency (social control), and offers strength for people during life’s tribulations (meaning and purpose) (Keirns, N. et al, p. 337, 2012). He held that the source of religion is the collective mind-set of society and that this cohesive bond of social order resulted from common values in a society (Keirns, N. et al, p. 337, 2012). Additionally, he contended that these values need to be maintained to sustain social stability (Keirns, N. et al, p. 337,
Marx saw religion as an evil that existed in society and that it brought down all the people that believed in that religion. Marx said that, ?It [religion] is the opium of the people,?[1] and in saying this, Marx meant that religion was contagious on society. Once the society had a taste for the religion, they became totally engulfed it in, and then they do not want to get out of that way of live because they see it as a good way to live. Then even if people wanted to get out of the religion it was hard to get out because the whole society had already been infected by the ?opium.?
Religion helps establish mankind’s place in the order of the universe. As civilization began to be established through the domestication of animals, the irrigation and cultivation of agricultural crops, and life became more complex (moving from mainly a hunter/gather existence to one that could settle down and have more time to consider advanced ideas) people began to consider questions such as, where life comes from, is there a creator or creators who helped make the world, and what happens after we die. Religion helped answer some of these questions. It gave people purpose, meaning, and perspective. Religion helped establish nations in the case of religious theocratic governments. In many of the ancient civilizations, such as the Egyptians, the Mayans, and even Mesopotamia, the priests and other religious leaders played prominent roles in help shaping the laws and government of these civilizations. As his...
Religion began as a way to explain unfathomable gaps in understanding how the world and the things within it worked. It became a fundamental part of many lives because it gave the population faith and understanding as to why things functioned the way they did. Unexplainable events were concluded as the will of a higher being, as it was the simplest rational. Nonetheless, time has shifted, and with different ages comes change. However important they were when our kind had no other explanation for the universe or way to be governed; religious beliefs have become undermined by our development and advancement in the understanding of our morals and needs to provide order and reason: law.
By the early twentieth century the belief in human progress and the progressive evolution of human history, which has been at the center of modern though since the Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century, was being seriously challenged. Identify the main established concepts and traditions that were challenged, who the most influential challengers were, and the new theories, arguments, works, etc. that they produced