The Sociological Perspective as a Viewpoint of Human Behavior and its Connection to the Entire Society - Article Example

Sociology and religion What is sociological perspective and how does it affect the way we study religion? The sociological perspective is a viewpoint of human behavior and its connection to the entire society. This viewpoint influences the determination of connections that exist between the behavior of individuals as well as the structures that exist in society. In a typical situation, people will tend to think that their society is just natural, thereby assuming its effects (Johnstone, 2007). However, the sociological perspective provides people with the opportunity to understand that the society is an important aspect that helps in shaping their everyday lives. With this consideration, one can be able to argue that sociological perspectives involve the maintenance of objectivity, which is possible to determine by testing and critically evaluating ideas. With this consideration, there is a possibility of determining that sociologists study religion as a belief system and as a social institution. The study of religion from the sociological perspective recognizes the fact that what an individual believes about religion is not important. The vital factor in this case is the individual’s ability to examine religion in an objective manner, which takes recognition of the cultural or social context. From this perspective, it is feasible to argue that sociologists are interested in determining how religious beliefs relate to other factors like gender, race, age and education, among other factors. On the other hand, sociologists tend to look at religion in terms of its effects to social change, as well as the organization of the religious institutions. Alternatively, they consider some of the influences that religion has on other social institutions, for instance, educational and political institutions. Apart from showing interest in relation to these considerations, the study of religion from a sociological perspective involves the study of the consistency or intensity of the practice of a group or individual’s faith. The difference between the sociological perspective and the non-social scientific perspectives to the study of religion The non-social scientific approaches to the study of religion include the philosophical and theological approaches. By using only the theological and philosophical perspectives, some of the great philosophers of antiquity were concentrating on looking at imaginary or ideal societies, rather than the determination of the reality existing in society. For this rationale, it is feasible to argue that the philosophers were keen on coming up with constructs on the ideal form of religion, which differs sharply with the sociological perspective on the study of religion. The disparity emanates from the fact that the sociological perspective focuses on analyzing the actual religious operations in society, whereas the non-social perspectives focus on the analysis of what is the “ideal” religion. The difference between the sociological perspective and the social scientific perspectives to the study of religion The social scientific perspectives include anthropological and psychological perspectives, which focus on the problems or the nature of beliefs. The difference between this perspective and the sociological perspective is the fact that the social scientific perspective involves studying the existing religious institutions, and finding how these institutions relate to other social institutions (Johnstone, 2007). On the other hand, the social scientific perspective looks into the differences existing in the religious practices and beliefs across different cultures. With these considerations it would be necessary to indicate that the anthropological perspective in the study of religion focuses more on the concept of meaning through using symbolic, cognitive and functional approaches. What is religion and where does it come from? It is possible to identify religion as the human quest for the sacred, or the response to and experience of the sacred or holy being. There are three ways through which individuals could be able to express religion, which include practical expressions through action, in fellowship and in thought. From history, myths, institutional forms, ethnic prescriptions and rituals, among other considerations, there is the possibility of extracting different forms of religious expressions. Through religion, individuals in society can be able to establish moral codes that are likely to be applicable in controlling behavior. Additionally, the people, through religion, develop a sense of community. Contrary to the sociological perspective considerations of the origin of religion, anthropological explanations indicate that the origins of religion are based on empirical observations (Johnstone, 2007). Some of the nineteenth century anthropologists believed that religion arose from people’s experiences with the world they were living in. The development of religious beliefs arose from some of the natural occurrences like lightning, earthquakes and thunder among other natural calamities. Through this, the people developed the urge of finding ways of understanding some of the factors that caused them. This development led to the evolution of religion (Johnstone, 2007). According to Max Muller’s suggestion, these natural events were taking place due to the human activities, which led to the evolution of a belief in spirits that were assumed to cause the natural events. Relative merits of theories proposed by Durkheim, Marx and the rational choice theorists Durkheim is recognized as the first sociologist to analyze the concept of religion by looking at its impact to the society. He believed that religion was communal in nature. For this reason, Durkheim argued that through religion, it was possible for people to experience social cohesion as well as promote the consistency of behavior or social control. Through religion, Durkheim also argued that individuals in society gave people the meaning and purpose of life. Through this revelation, it is possible to insinuate that Durkheim is a supporter of the functionalism theory of religion. Functionalists believe that religion serves a number of purposes or functions in society. This means that religion gives people the opportunity to socially interact and form groupings that provide social support among other considerations. Karl Marx also studied the concept of religion, from which he was able to conclude that religion is a reflection of the society’s social stratification. He posits that religion is responsible for the perpetuation of the status quo, arguing that it is an extension of the proletariat. The concept of religion according to Karl Marx informs the conflict theory of religion. According to this theory, religion is an institution that assists in the maintenance of patterns promoting social inequality. This perspective promotes the idea that through religion, people should be satisfied with the circumstances that they might be living in. the conflict theorists also argue that the people in power in a religion have the ability of dictating beliefs, rituals and practices by making interpretations to the religious texts. According to the rational choice theory, rationality is “marked by consistent, goal-oriented activity” (Stark, 1997). According to proposals of the theory, people are not necessarily selfish, but they are self-interested. This means that they will make choices expecting to make best use of positive outcomes and minimize negative ones. With this consideration, it might be relevant to indicate that people view religion in terms of the rewards or costs that they are likely to incur from participation in religious activities. However, sociologists refute the idea that it is possible to measure costs and rewards of religion or that people use rationality in making decisions on their religious affiliations. Fundamentalism The most appropriate explanation of fundamentalism is the idea that it is a movement developed to evoke the ideological purity existing in a given form of religion. The ideological purity being recaptured through fundamentalism happens to be missing due to a mainstream that is adherent via the creed at large. Other relevant explanations to fundamentalism include the idea that it demands for stringent adherence that is under orthodox theological doctrines. It is usually comprehended as an occurrence that operates against modernist theology. The modernist theology serves a purpose that endorses continuity with accuracy (Johnstone, 2007). The term has significance to its initial supporters who used it to illustrate five classic theological viewpoints that are common in Christianity. Sources and impacts of Fundamentalism Among the North American Mennonites, fundamentalism seems to have had a significant implication because it influenced the lives that the people lived alongside their theology. Sources confirm that soon after the occurrence of the Second World War, the Mennonite cathedral started making significant shifts that were directed away from fundamentalism. Through literature at the source of fundamentalism, it is identified that the cathedral had a movement that protested against theological with sociological alterations that were effectively under the Mennonite church. From the Mennonite Church’s past, there is determination of possible implications of fundamentalism to the Mennonite’s conservative movement. The history of the development of protestant fundamentalism is necessary for the identification of possible effects resulting from fundamentalism. Fundamentalism turns out to be a movement originating from the United States. The movement pioneered from a group of conservative Presbyterians that were theologians, and it took place the late nineteenth century following the Second World War (Johnstone, 2007). The growth of the movement was tremendous among conservatives from alternative Baptists along with alternative denominations. The fundamentalism movement was developed with the main purpose of reaffirming essential theological tenets with significance to defend the theologians from confrontations by none interventionist theology and superior criticism. In the present day, fundamentalism is applied for identification of any given religion with the desire to have an experience on the religion’s fundamentals. The term formerly identified formal movements that were present under the Protestant Christianity around the 1920s. The group of Christians from that period put emphasis on unembroidered Bible reading with an implication on the militant move toward Christianity. The key players under fundamentalism included a group of Christians, Islam, Hinduism, and Judaism among others. One of the tenets representing fundamentalism includes the ease of a pure individual to become spoiled that is believed to influence life that is outside the mainstream society. The availability of an unrestrained association between individuals with dissimilar opinions with a fundamentalist happens to be regarded as hazardous. An interesting discovery about fundamentalists suggests that they tend to consider their actions as positive through justifications that base on violence via religious means with believe that their actions are righteous. There are instances that are referenced as political, cultural, and global fundamentalism. According to studies conducted on the augmentation of the religious fundamentalism, there is the determination of the fact that it has a connection to international terrorism threat. An Oklahoma City terror campaign attributed to the connection between religious fundamentalists with terrorism. References Johnstone, R, L. (2007). Religion in society: A sociology of religion. Eighth edition. Ball State university. Stark, R. (1997). Rational choice theory and religion. Young & Lawrence. Read More