Religion is one of the biggest functions in our society. (Kabamba, September 23) Religious rituals are also taught from the time one is born. Religion does not have to be one specific sect or group of people but religion is defined by the beliefs of the people and their ideologies. Beliefs in this day and age range on a continuum from having a God or higher being who is in charge of their lives to the other end of that continuum that there is no belief in a higher power or God.
Emile Durkheim’s vision of religion is based on experience. (Durkheim, 1965) There are many reasons why people do what they do and one of the biggest reasons is because of experience and their understanding of the rituals. Religion for Durkheim is an organized attempt to bridge the gap between the known and the unknown in our lives; between the profane world of our every day experience and the sacred, the extraordinary world located outside of that experience. For Durkheim, what is ultimately unknown to us is our collective being in society. (Kabamba, December 3) Society lies within each of us and also outside. Religion is both subjective and objective and it is though religion that helps us link the subjective and objective together and live in peace in our society. (Durkheim, 1965)
Through rituals and religion, we worship our unrealized powers of society. We call that power God and Durkheim believes that God provides the stability that we need to function as a society. Taking it a step
However, Durkheim's analysis has been criticised as he only looked at small pre-industrial societies so his views do not apply to complex modern societies. Also he fails to account for the
Religion is defined as A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual being (Mifflin). It is known that many of our behaviours are determined by the presence of religion in one's life. Religion implants its principles in a person and their attitudes, personality, morals and ethics and alters it to a great extent. This
As I read Émile Durkheim’s classic piece, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, I experienced a whirlwind of thoughts, expressing agreement, disagreement, and complete puzzlement over the details of his logic and conclusions. As far as my essay goes, I will attempt to put these thoughts in a neat, coherent order like the one mentioned above.
Again, in EFRL, Durkheim shows religiosity from a sociological standpoint in which “individual consciousness” is combined with “common consciousness.” To look at it another way, individuals use signs and symbols to interpret and/or explain their feelings. If the group all uses the same signs and symbols, it then becomes the symbol or representation of the group’s sacredness. Even if the individual is no longer part of the collective society, he still holds the sacredness of the signs/symbols to the same high standard, and he does this by way of festivals, ceremonies, etc.
Émile Durkheim and Mircea Eliade have dissimilar understandings of religion. Emile Durkheim did not have an interest in a belief system or the cognitive approach. He dismissed the study of how particular beliefs lead to certain practices and adopted a functionalist approach. He does not acknowledge the belief in God, rather focuses on what religion does within society. He believed that individuals encompassed a more pure form and focused on the essential structure of religion. His theory of totemism developed, which centers around the idea that the subject of religion is to bring people together, and to ultimately result in social cohesion. He metaphorically relates this to when people in a community rally around the totem. Furthermore, making the totem represent the sacred. Durkheim then understands that the totem will eventually develop into a spirit, and ultimately into a ‘God’ or spiritual form. Moreover, connecting a society on a metaphysical level. This concept does not center around a belief system, rather on social cohesion.
Conversely, according to (Turner 23-109), Durkheim points out that religion is part and parcel of the society and that each society has religion. Emile Durkheim’s purpose was to assess the connection between particular religions in various cultures, and finding a common cause. Basically, he wanted to comprehend the three major aspects of religion; that is the empirical together with the social and the spirituality components. His definition of religion is that; it is a joining arrangement of beliefs together with practices in relation to sacred things. According to him, it is religion that establishes the contemporary society as
Emile Durkheim was a taught by a teacher and to add was a sociologist. Durkheim singularly developed sociology and is credited for expanding to academic discipline, social structures, social relationships, and social institutions, in attempt to understand human nature. Later Durkheim took these and applied them into religion. Durkheim focused on the importance of the concept of the sacred" and its relevance to the welfare of the entire community.
Durkheim considered religion within a social context. His primary concepts involve the “separation between the sacred and profane; ideas of souls
In order to combat anomie Durkheim asserts that people turn to religion. Religion for Durkheim was not divinely inspired but was simply a set of collective beliefs that shaped norms and values, norms and values that shaped
Throughout my childhood, I have been nurtured in communal values, having been raised in the security of a tightly-knit Jewish community. My appreciation of my family and religious background have led me to want to pursue studies in the field of religion, more specifically the nature of G-d who has, until now, played a vital part in my life and shaped my values, beliefs and behaviour. I have a constantly questioning mind and, through my involvement with a religious community, I have developed an interest in the origin and nature of religious belief, and religion's role in society. This recently led me to Emile Durkheim's The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, in which he attempts to yield an understanding of religion by investigating Australian
Whitehead views religion as what an individual does while in solitary. To understand religion, it must be focused on the individual. Durkheim believes that society controls what values in religion are important. In my opinion, I think being able to understand religion needs to be focused on the societal views. Durkheim makes a point about how religion is declared as a private matter, when in reality, it is a creation of a community. The book goes on to talk about how religion creates cohesion within society. I think individual religions have their own set of beliefs and values that is decided upon by the group. This is what makes religion more of a societal focus rather than individual.
According to author Randall Collins, Emile Durkheim has been deemed sociologies most famous representative (Collins, The Durkheimian Tradition, 211.) The Durkeimian Tradition is “sociology’s most original and unusual set of ideas but revolutionary in the same sense ” (Collins, 211). Durkheim contributed an insightful view on the role of religion and how “God is the symbol of the society and its moral power over individuals” (Collins, 211.) By proving that “religion is the moral foundation of society” simply shows the dire need of religion in order to live. As a result of following any religion comes a consistent ritual, no matter what steps it consists of and a link to social interaction. According to Durkheim, rituals are instrumental in the process of providing concepts or ideas that directly echo the structure of society (Collins, 212.) Durkeim’s original beliefs still apply to the structure of society today. Though it may not be solely focused on religion, people identify themselves within other social groups. I myself identify to be apart of a social group with my involvement in the women’s basketball team at Hofstra. Like other student-athletes, there is an obvious distinction of athletes around campus and noticeable segregation between athletes and regular students. Durkheim discussed rituals that took place amongst those who followed a religion, and like that social group; my team performs
Emile Durkheim and Max Weber are two prominent philosophers whose theories unequivocally differed on countless themes. The outlooks of Durkheim and Weber contrast however, their general message in which they attempt to convey are of similar ideologies. When examining Durkheim and the concept of sacred and profane, one would see how it parallels with Weber’s notion of enchantment and disenchantment. Their stances on religion correspond with each other and despite their distinct conceptual frameworks and differing perspectives, Durkheim and Weber both offer profound contributions to the concepts of religion and modernity.
In order to truly assess the legitimacy of Durkheim 's functionalist definition of religion, his notion of Social facts, (upon which his theory is constructed) must be examined. Durkheim advocated that amongst the reputable fields of biology, psychology and history, Sociology also warranted a specific focus. It was, for him: a 'sui generis ' "something that had to be explained on its own terms". Sociology was not, for Durkheim, a field that should be susceptible to overlapping subject matter: he believed that there existed concrete social facts recognisable "by the power of eternal coercion" which they are "capable of exercising over individuals". This claim is an imperative one because it is the platform on which his functionalist
Similarly to Weber, Durkheim believed that religion plays an integral part in society. He defined religion as a “unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things… beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral community called a church...” (Durkheim EF: 47). This functional definition describes what Durkheim believes what role religion plays in contemporary society: it unities it. He analyzed religion within the context of the entire society and recognized its influence on people’s thoughts and behaviors. Durkheim was interested in the communal bonds forged by participating in religious activities and stressed the importance of the communal aspect of religion.