The crux of Emile Durkheim’s The Elementary Forms of Religious Life lies in the concept of collective effervescence, or the feelings of mutually shared emotions. Through a hermeneutical approach, Durkheim investigates the reflexiveness of social organization, the balance between form and content, and the immense cooperation in collective representations. In his work, society is the framework of humanity and gives it meaning, whereas religion acts as the tool to explain it. Since society existed prior to the individual, the collective mind must be understood before the concept of the individual can be grasped. However, one component seems missing from his social theory – what underlies society in terms of rituals and rites? Only when this …show more content…
By identifying with a group, collective emotions can be experienced even in solitude, as evidenced by the existence of two separate worlds. The use of “incommensurable” points to the dichotomy of society and the individual and highlights the fact that the social construct consists of individual components rather than a single entity. This is evidenced when a man speaks to the crowd and “His language becomes high-flown…the feelings he arouses return to him enlarged and amplified, reinforcing his own to the same degree” (212). The speaker expresses the collective sentiment and, much like a biological positive feedback loop, the emotions of the crowd resonate back to the speaker. Thus the speaker transcends his own identity as simply an individual and becomes an incarnate of the group. When emotions trickle down from society to the individual, they loop back and beget society. By investigating the piacular rites of the Australian aborigines, Durkheim suggests that social rituals create both a sense of grief and group duty. Primitive forms of mourning consist of “beating, bruising, lacerating, and burning oneself…sometimes [to the extent that] they do not survive their wounds” (402). Through these acts of self-inflicted pain and torment, members of society partake in a form of re-presenting the dichotomy of life and death. The emotional rites seem to stem from society itself, for the rites embody the rites of
Durkheim defines religion as “a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things”. He says all societies
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.
The rituals of a society must be analyzed as well to further understand the actions of the society and its people. Huxley writes about two religious ceremonies, one celebrated by the `civilized' society and the other by the `savage' society. The `civilized' people hold a Solidarity Service where twelve people get together and chant and shout out songs about topics such as the promiscuous idea of "orgy porgy" (84) and the idea that "I am you and you are I." (82) In order to continue ingraining the ideas of a stability and community as an adult, these services are held to continue conditioning the people. In this case, religion is used more as a tool than as a way to grow spiritually. For this society, we can understand that stability and community are very important to them and this ceremony shows this aspect.
It reinforced the morals and social norms held collectively by all within a society. Society, to Durkheim, was greater than the individual and it gave people strength and support and made things possible and meaningful. The function of religion was to keep society in check, to assist social control, and to provide individual meaning for each individual’s life.
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.
Written during one of the most defining moments in Indigenous Australian history, Enoch and Deborah Mailman’s ‘the 7 stages of grieving’ follows a young Aboriginal woman as she retells some of the hardships and injustices her and her people have and will continue to face. With the quote above in mind, it is clear to see that ‘The 7 stages of grieving’ combines the contemporary conventions of Australian theatre, such as applying multimedia with a decidedly traditional twist. Through the use of stagecraft and symbolism,
In this paper, we will discuss the different death rituals performed in different cultures. We view death rituals from Native Americans, Africans, those of the Chinese decent, and endocannibalism from the Fore tribe of Papua New Guinea. Death is universal to all people in every culture. Responses to how one deals with death and dying differ greatly. Death rituals are usually based on beliefs. This can come from religion, history, language, and art.
Emile Durkheim was French sociologist. He was born on April 15, 1858 in Epinal, France. Epinal is located in the Eastern French Province, Lorraine. His father, Moise was the Chief Rabbi of Epinal, Vosges, and Haute-Marne, while his mother, Melanie, worked as an embroiderer. Durkheim was the youngest of their four surviving children.
He describes the totem emblem as a symbol both for a society and its sacredness. This is because, he states in his fundamental hypothesis, "god and society are one and the same," though not necessarily on a conscious level. For Durkheim, religion is what brings people together by reinforcing social relations and moral norms through a "collective effervescence" or group energy. This energy, when felt by the individual, is not recognized as the result of communal energies, but is attributed to the sacred.
In this essay I will be looking at the theories of Edward Burnett Tylor and Émile Durkheim, and comparing them to see which theory I think gives a better explanation about what religion is, or whether religion is actually definable. On the one hand we have Tylor’s theory that tells us that religion is belief in spiritual beings and that religion is just a step on the way to reaching full evolutionary potential. Durkheim’s theory, however, says that religion is very much a social aspect of life, and something can only be religious or “sacred” if it is something public (Durkheim 1965:52). Ultimately these theories do not give us an outright explanation about what ‘religion’ is, but there are aspects of the theory that can be used to gain an understanding or idea.
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.
Moreover, Durkheim compares religion to society. He says that society is the cause of the unique sensations of the religious experiences, so called “sui generis” (Ritzer, 84). This concept
A religion can be seen as a unified system of beliefs and practices which are relative to sacred things and beliefs (Giddens 1972, p.224). It can shape ones thoughts and feelings and gives people a sense of hope and something to believe in. All three main sociologist writers Karl Marx, Max Weber and Emile Durkheim offer different perspectives on religion and how important it is to society. Some of the theorists chose to have a positive view whilst others argue the unimportance of religion. This essay attempts to discover which theorist has the most accurate perspective of religion in modern times. This is done by firstly explaining the basic ideas regarding to religion put forward by Marx, Weber and Durkheim. Then both Marx's and