Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Relationship between religion and politics
Religion as a conservative force theories
What is the relationship between religion and politics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Relationship between religion and politics
The View that Religion Acts as a Conservative Force on Society Even though sociologists do not have a true definition of religion they believe that religion is a belief in the supernatural. Some sociologists believe that religion acts as a conservative force. A conservative force is something that prevents change within society and also maintains the status quo. Functionalist believes that religion is a conservative force. Durkhiem believes that everybody shares the same beliefs and values that are represented by sacred symbols. Durkhiem would argue that religion acts as a conservative force as it reinforces the collective conscious. Durkhiem would argue that as people worship in church they are worshiping a set of values that society shares. Therefore the collective conscious is reinforced and status quo is maintained. Durkhiem’s study of the Australian aborigines “totemism” showed that they had sacred symbol in which they worshiped, this is the totem pole. He argued that when the aborigines worshiped the totem they were worshiping society. This reinforced the collective conscious and unified the group and allowed the status quo to be maintained. Durkhiem would also agree that religion acts as a conservative force as it helps social solidarity within society. He would argue that when people worship in churches it brings people together creating social solidarity, this reinforces the collective conscious and maintains the status quo. Durkeim says that religion provides the individual with the motivation to face up to life and social support based upon a sense of belonging to each individual. This maintains the status quo as it... ... middle of paper ... ...has made a lot more people aware of alternative solutions than always depending upon god. Therefore they are less likely to have behaviour governed by god, this leads to social change. As there is now a large amount of religions that exist in society people believe that it is better to not have a religion at all, Berger argues that this leads to anomie as religion no longer provides the meaning to life. Nelson a sociologist also believes that religion does not act as conservative. He argues that religion creates most of the problems that occur within society, for example the conflict between two religions in Northern Ireland (protestant and catholic) Nelson believes that religion is the source of much unrest. Therefore as religion is the cause of unrest within society it does not help to maintain the status quo.
A functioning society seeks to work together in harmony to maintain a state of balance and social equilibrium for the whole. There are thousands of different types of religions in the world. So how do they maintain this ability to function and to keep a society functioning. Not all religions are as harmonious. Berger states there is a crisis of credibility a loss of religious legitimacy and plausibility. Pluralism threatens to rip apart a
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.
Throughout the day’s observation, a plethora of sociological concepts become abundantly apparent. However, for the purpose of this paper, we will only focus on the day’s greatest prevalent concepts. The first concept that strikes as a significant sociological concept is family as it is the opening and closing concept of the day. Next, the concept of gender roles appears as important because of the masculine groups that are so prevalent during observation. Third, the theory of religion grabs its place in prevalence due to its ability to center and focus the entire day. Lastly, the concept of stage theory rears into the spot as a result of interactions in the work center. When reviewing these sociological concepts, it becomes abundantly clear
The role of religion in politics is a topic that has long been argued, and has contributed to the start of wars, schisms (both political and religious), and other forms of inter and intra-state conflict. This topic, as a result of its checkered past, has become quite controversial, with many different viewpoints. One argument, put forth by many people throughout history, is that religion and the government should remain separate to avoid any conflicting interests. This view also typically suggests that there is one, or several, large and organized religions like the Roman Catholic Church, which would be able to use their “divine” authority to sway the politics of a given state by promising or threatening some form of godly approval or disapproval. By leveraging their divine power, individual figures within a religion, as well as the religion as a whole, could gain secular power for themselves, or over others. A second view, which was developed by many theologians through history, suggests that that without religion there would be a general lack of morality in the people and leaders of a given state, which would give way to poor political decisions that would not be in the interest of the people and perhaps even God (or the gods). This argument, however, does not address the fact that morality can exist without religion. In sociology, it is commonly accepted that social norms, which include morality, can result from any number of things. Religion, laws, or the basic desire of survival can all create these norms, so it suffices to say that as a society, our morals reflect our desire to live in relative peace through the creation of laws that serve to help us to survive. The argument of whether or not religion and politics should mix...
Parsons claims that religion is our primary source of meaning; it answers the eternal questions and help to understand things like suffering and pain. It also produces, sacralises and legitimises the core values of society e.g. Protestantism in the USA encouraged individualism, democracy and equality of opportunity. Bellah claims that there is a civil religion and gives the example of America and its faith in Americanism, he says that civil religion unites society. However the functionalist view can be criticised: It focuses on the positive aspects of religion and ignores that it is the cause of conflict in much of the world e.g. Northern Ireland and conflict between protestants and Catholics, It does not explain the origins of religion, explaining what functions religion performs does not help us to know where it came from. Durkheim did his studies I small scale non-literate societies, it is difficult to see how religion performs its functions in out large complex religiously plural society.
He claims that the only differentiation between magic and religion is the lack of unity of people living the same life in magic, as he expresses ‘the magician stands aloof’. The concept of the ‘Church’ is the communal faith and the similar view towards the relations between the sacred and profane. This is a popular belief among sociologists of religion. Northcott, who supports Durkheim’s religion definition, expresses that ‘religion is therefore a source of social and moral order, binding the members of society to a common social project, a set of shared values and social goals’ (1999). It is true that Durkheim regarded religion as a product of society and claimed all religion was the origin of moral beliefs. Furthermore, due to the belief that religion is a reflection of society, Durkheim rejects the belief that religiously diverse societies could successfully integrate. Stark et al believe that ‘it does not seem to have occurred to him that several faiths could generate independent, co-existing moral
some, such as Karl max saw that religion is a way strong of a tool that impairs social evaluation. Which resulted in ethnic and religious cleansing and furthermore proved to be the wrong approach to defining the role that religion plays in societies behaviors. I for one, think that religion is an indispensable and integral part of human sociology; furthermore, I believe understanding this relationship would lead to social development.
...gion” developed by socialism of religion. She warns of “the global upsurge of religiously inspired violence” caused by “National Socialism” (Kurtz). Kurtz questions whether collective faith is beneficial to nations as a whole.
Functionalists believe religion is a conservative force that performs positive functions of promoting social integration and social solidarity through the reinforcement of value consensus. In this essay I will draw on ideas from Durkheim, Malinowski, Parsons and Bellah. I will then evaluate these theorists with Marxist, feminist and postmodernist perspectives in order to assess the extent functionalism helps us to understand religion today.
The place of religion in the public square is a debateable topic. In essence, the dispute centers on the fundamental question: should religious beliefs be excluded from consideration of public policy? That is to say, if society strongly believes that the state should not adopt or implement religious positions, views or policies; to what extent should religious ideologies or concepts be used to publicly support or oppose governmental actions? Or perhaps do religious beliefs and public policy make too dangerous a mixture to even consider? In any vibrant culture, governmental decisions and actions are largely influenced by the public square. Policy-makers discuss, justify and support or oppose public issues in hopes of reaching a consensus in the enforcement of public policy. Liberal thoughts within public debates clash when placed in the same forum as democratic pluralistic societies. Religion, in theory, is a sense of individuality. Thus, to exclude religious beliefs from considerations of public policy would be close to impossible. So is it acceptable for public officials to make decisions grounded in part by religion? This paper asserts that religious beliefs should be excluded from consideration of public policy because; 1) it leads to the ignorance of many religious minorities in the face of dominating religious groups; 2) religious views jeopardize social stability; and finally, 3) it diverges the basis of political decisions from the needs of the public.
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,
The. London Hunt, Stephen J (2002) Religion in Western Society. London. The. Palgrave McGuire, Meredith B. & Co. (1997) Religion: The Social Context, 4th edition. Wadsworth Pickering, W. S. F. (1984) Durkheim’s Sociology of Religion: Themes and Theories.
" Religion is not just a social, cultural, political, or ideological factor; instead it finds its power in the personal chambers of the soul of the individual. Within the soul we discover the source of the private motivation that forms perceptions and behavior ( pg 7, Rediscovering the Kingdom)."
In the first paragraph of the article, he lists various forms of people and philosophy, and their views of the relationship between religion and deviance. Functionalists and Marxists support the theory that religion deters deviance. Functionalism is a philosophy which states that what makes something a characteristic of a mental state is dependent on its function to the cognitive mind. Marxism is the view and critique which is applied to capitalism and class struggle as the systemic economy changed during the 19th century. (Merton 1968, p.98).
Leadership, without doubt, is a significantly important function of management. It helps to aggrandize efficiency and to fulfil an organization’s goals. Leadership is the ability of a manager to induce the subordinates to work with confidence, determination, courage and zeal. It is also defined as ability to influence a group towards the realization of a goal. Leaders should have the capability of developing future visions, and to drive the organizational members to want to attain the visions. This paper states my points in which I duly believe, justifies the importance of an outstanding leader in any organization.