Religion and Social Theories - Literature review Example

Religion and social theories (Institution) (Name) (Course) (Module) (Instructor) 15th Feb 2010 Introduction Religion is one of the most powerful and influential social themes that has received wide attention in practice and in theory. Christiano, Swatos and Kavisto (2002) define religion as a set of beliefs that seeks to explain the cause, nature and purpose of life and the universe at large. Haught (1990) differs with the idea of pinpointing what religion really is. He says that modern scholars have ‘created’ a modern concept of religion that differs from the traditional religion. He says that although historically religion was present and practiced, the people had no name for it as it blended well with normal life. Caputo (2001) concurs with this and says that religion is “maddeningly polyvalent and too uncontainably diverse for us to fit it all under one roof” (1). Therefore, he says that religion has no subject matter. Caputo (2001) thus says that religion is love for God where God is not definite. The definition of God is the basis that creates different religions. Therefore, religion as a social concept is somehow vague and different approaches can be used. This paper thus addresses the different approaches and definitions of religion through four social theories: functionalism, Marxism, Conflict Sociology and Social Interactionism. Functionalism This theory is a culmination of a number of historical theories in sociology. The theory came into being with contribution of Herbert Spencer (1820–1903), Auguste Comte (1798–1857), Emile Durkheim (1858–1917), Bronislaw Malinowski (1884–1942) and A. R. Radcliffe-Brown (1881–1955) though it is Durkenheim who received the credit. This theory proposes that all parts in a system fulfill a necessary latent function that serves to ensure there is stability through the homeostasis principle. The theory seeks to define different entities in the society separately and observe how they contribute towards the social system. It views a society as an organism which has several organs, religion being among them, with each performing a designated role. This organism has various needs which also must be fulfilled. Therefore, religion as an organ has some needs to fulfill in the society (Scot, 2006). Approach to religion Going by this theory, religion has a unique place and function in the society. The theory suggest that religion sis force for stability and change in the society as it prevents change, conserves traditional values and reinforces political ideologies which are viewed to be beneficial. On the other hand, religion is credited with some disadvantages such as justification of social inequality, condones suffering and creates passive individuals by brainwashing the people to accept the status quo (Religion¶). Durkeheim argued that religion was the glue that held the society together (Christiano et al 2002). However, his definition of religion was later refuted because an increase in crime and moral decay in the society, as it was happening then would imply deterioration of religion which was not the case. Critique The functionalism approach denies the supernatural aspect of religion. The theory fails to approach the altruistic nature of religion and some scholars who support functionalism look at religion as a way of preserving culture. Haught (1990) on the other hand says that religion is an expression of love to God. While the functionalist approach argues that religion plays a unique role is maintaining social stability, some of the roles assigned to it from this approach are debatable. The view of religion as the glue that holds the society together is both worn and right. Right in the fact that religion forms another platform for interaction among the people and that it encourages good relations among the people. On the other hand, this perception entirely ignores the function of religion as a search for spiritual nourishment and a link to the supernatural world. Marxism This is a political and economic ideology that has been heavily imported into sociology where it is aimed at fighting capitalism which is believed to have outlived its usefulness and is blamed for a number of social problems such as the presence of classes and unequal distribution of wealth and resources. This ideology was founded by Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx with the ideology being named after Marx. This ideology has been the foundation of political ideologies such as communism socialism, Nazism Maoism among others. In social aspect, it calls for equality and abolition of classes and upholds labor strikes in order to press for demands (Scott 2006). This theory assumes that man is very materialistic and that all his endeavors are aimed at ensuring he is materially satisfied. Marxism does not recognize spiritual and emotional needs but rather argues that while these needs might exist, they all lead to material needs. Simply put, man can only receive motivation to engage in certain activities by the material benefits in the long run. For instance, it would suffice that man only engages in religion such as Christianity to pray fro wealth and blessings from above in terms of material things. Approach to religion There are a number of approaches to religion through Marxism. However, one of the most significant one is philosophical materialism. This approach denies existence of any supernatural being in the universe or anything unnatural. This is direct contrast to religion which is directly an appreciation of supernatural beings and of things out of this universe. To Karl Marx, religion is just a fascination with the unknown which he discreetly called the “opium of the masses.” He implied that religion is an illusionary happiness created to divert people’s attention from their worries and indeed make them happy (Cline 2002). Criticism Marxism identifies a very interesting fact about religion, fanaticism. Some people get obsessed with religion that they boarder on the irrational and insane. However, this ideology finds no fault with religion but the desperation of the society and more the economically disadvantaged. Cline (2002) says that, Marx views religion as one symptom of the disease afflicting the society caused by poverty and a direct result of capitalism. Therefore, Marxism recognizes that religion helps the people wait upon the abolition of capitalism. Consequently, Marxist views then would consider religion unnecessary in a communist or socialist society. The materialist conception of man is too far fetched and far removed from reality as it ignores nature. This philosophy assumes that man is positioned to change everything and as such should not take relief in accepting the status quo such as the inequalities in resource and wealth distribution brought about by capitalism. In his view of religion therefore, he sees that if there were no troubles such as poverty and emotional needs, man would in no way practice religion. He sees that religion is an escape from materialistic dissatisfaction by the people. Conflict sociology This theory was developed out of Karl Marx’s work on difference in social class though it contrasts Marx’s principles on social cohesion and mindfulness of others. It suggests that every individual in the society strives to improve his position and in the process weakening the positions of others. It thus implies that for one to attain more benefits, another person has to lose. This aspect makes the theory contradictory to functionalism in the sense that each entity in the society is a threat t the other and that they do not work together to maintain a social balance. This theory therefore makes four basic assumptions that there is competition, war, structural inequality and revolution (Scot 2006). Approach to religion This theory denies what Marxism suggests that religion is a justified distraction from other problems and says that there is more to religion than that. This theory recognizes religion as a force which struggles to take its place in the society. This theory thus appreciates the role of religion and its occasionally domineering of other social themes such as politics and culture. For instance the Sharia law, which is religion based among Muslims takes precedence before the political formulated law. Critique This theory does not provide a solid argument in its case as compared to others. For instance the theory at one time supports Marx for that competition is healthy while at the same time refutes his argument regarding religion. On the overall, it borrows the best from various philosophical ideas. This theory also focuses too much on negative aspects of the society. Its has a pessimistic view of the society in that virtues such as altruism, civil rights, democracy among many are not aimed for mutual benefit of the society but rather to control the society. It fails to see any good in social order and suspects that the good acts from the society are just over ups. Social interactionism This theory was developed by Herbert Blumer though the first ideas of this theory were developed by George H. Mead who died before publishing his works. It seeks to identify interaction between social actors by analyzing their subjective processes rather than the conventional way adopted by other theories that center on macrostructures and social systems in their entirety. It considers interactions at individual level and seeks to show how these individual interactions can be applied on the society level. It argues that an action by one person affects the other who has to respond and another person responds to his response. This continues gradually impacting the whole society. This theory comprises a number of sub-perspectives among them symbolic interactionism, phenomenology and ethnomethodology simply translated into layman’s language to meaning, language and thought respectively (Nelson, 1998). Symbolic interactionism says that meaning is a central theme in human behavior and interactions. It argues that man will make interactions that only have meaning and sense to him. In the process of making these interactions, he will need language to do so. A man will name a relationship or an interaction according to the meaning which he attaches to it. The thought as a third perspective comes into play where a person engages in mental conversation to imagine different views on the interaction in what the theory generally calls the third personality view (Nelson, 1998). This theory has also been nicknamed the ‘looking glass self’ in that it encourages people and entities to view themselves from third party perspectives. It offers one an opportunity to boost self esteem while at the same time the third party view can negatively impact the self esteem at a personal level. Such self criticism and evaluation allows one to pursue self improvement at all times. Approach to religion This theory does have not a solid stand in relation to religion. It views religion in a functional way though not similar to functionalism as it is given some level of autonomy but not immunity (Hinnells 2005). However, the personal interaction level can be imported into a macro level of religion. On one hand therefore, religion should consider who are members the by developing some definite principles which be attractive to certain group of people. Critique This theory fails to appreciate the structural components of a society but instead dwells on the individual level. This is unrealistic since structures are something that the society cannot do without. For instance the theory is somehow unable adequately address the issue of religion given that it occurs on large scale yet still it’s a structure. This theory also lacks continuity. Scott (2006) says this is because much of the development of the theory was carried out by Mead’s students as he died before he could publish his work. Nelson (1998) notes that, much weight has been given to symbolic interactionism leaving the other perspectives undeveloped fully. While symbolic interactionism is developed as a humanistic theory, its application is only relevant in previously held meaning. References Caputo, J. (2001). On religion. New York: Routledge Christiano, K., Swatos, W. & Kivitso, P. (2002). Sociology of religion: contemporary Developments, New York: Rowman Altamira, Cline, A. (2002). Karl Marx on Religion Is Religion the Opiate of the Masses? Retrieved online on 15th Feb from http://atheism.about.com/od/weeklyquotes/a/marx01.htm Haught, J. (1990). What is religion?: an introduction, New York: Paulist Press Hinnells, J. (2005).The Routledge companion to the study of religion. New York: Routledge Nelson, L. (1998) Herbert Blumer's Symbolic Interactionism. Retrieved online on 15th Feb from, http://www.colorado.edu/Communication/meta-discourses/Papers/App_Papers/Nelson.htm Religion. Retrieved online on 15th Feb from, http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:isEibzceCWQJ:www.ngfl-cymru.org.uk/vtc/ngfl/sociology/religion.ppt+Functionalism+religion&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ke Scott, J. (2006). Social theory: central issues in sociology Stevens, W. Religion: A functionalist assessment. Retrieved online on 15th Feb from http://www.helium.com/items/841304-religion-a-functionalist-assessment Read More