Sociology And Religion

Australia’s new dependence on America resulted in a large influx of American soldiers to Australia and while Australian society was initially accepting and welcoming of their unorthodox culture, behaviours and morals, this quickly turned to contempt and created an unsavoury relationship between Australians and Americans whom they saw as being a bad influence on the women and youth of Australia. Australians regarded Americans as being, “overpaid, oversexed and over-here”. However, while this had the possibility to cause influential divides in society, Australians realised the necessity for the American presence in their country and the security they had provided, overruling any irritation felt towards them. The Australian war effort in the pacific regions had also served to amplify and fuel the ‘Anzac legend’ creating a national sense of pride and unity during the war. Australia’s involvement in the Second World War thus served to create a more independent Australia, in charge of its own policies and decisions in foreign affairs, creating cohesion within society.

and subsequent reinvestment of capital, is an end that both Weber and Marx reach in their analyses of society and agree on in definition. However, while Marx tells us that phantoms of the brain i.e. morality, religion, ideology, cannot develop independently of material production or influence it, Weber argues that ideas and religion can indeed determine life and the processes of life, namely our material production. The key difference between the two is their scope of factors that can cause historical development. Marx only allows for one factor, productive forces and the economic conditions resulting from them; Weber, on the other hand, acknowledges that while ideology and religion can support the economic relations as a driving factor, they can also develop independently and become a factor, a force on its own that can alter production, economic conditions, and thus history. By accounting for the multiple ways in which a society can be altered, Weber provides a more complete and applicable understanding of historical development and the powerful concept that an idea from an individual or group of individuals can have a legitimate and significant effect on the direction of society.

The Gallipoli campaign was described as the baptism of the newly federated Australia, and a chance for Australian soldiers to prove themselves to the world. They were not ultimately victorious, but the soldiers came to represent the character traits of the new country: fit and healthy, duty bound and courageous, good humored and egalitarian. The ANZAC image allowed Australians to both demonstrate loyalty to Britain, and claim an identity of their own. There is much to challenge the factual accuracy of the ANZAC image.

World War One is regarded as a major turning point in history and modern warfare which has impacted Australia monumentally, scarring the nation’s history. Australia played a significant role in World War One and the Gallipoli campaign, which is considered the birthplace of the ANZAC legend. These events have immensely shaped Australia as the nation we know of today. World War One began in 1914 from the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and ended in 1918 on November the 11th which is now recognised as a day of mourning and a time given recognition to the lives taken on the battlefield. To a prominent extent, the ANZAC legend is significant to the concept of Australian identity and nationalism through the origins of the ANZAC legend, the key events that have helped form Australia as an independent nation, and in addition to how ANZAC day is commemorated today.

‘A massive increase in the popularity and national significance of ANZAC Day’ (Source 1), grew throughout the twenty-first century. Since the landing of Gallipoli, it has been celebrated and as it continued, it quickly adapted to the cultural change of the media and technology which further improved the growth of its popularity. This day joins all Australians as one, in celebration to show their respect, compassion and pride for those people who sacrificed their lives for our freedom. Damian Morgan conveyed the change in society, but also the well-kept, treasured ANZAC Spirit.

Yet, the amount of emphasis that is placed on the Anzac legend could be argued to be incorrectly placed and channelled by certain groups for their own gain. This essay will argue that the Anzac legacy of the Australians being the perfect soldier is highly embellished and are no more remarkable than any other soldier. Furthermore the importance and Australia’s involvement in the First World War has been grossly inflated. Additionally, this will analyse claims made by historians and other academics about how the Anzac legend has changed overtime, and Australia’s involvement in wars.

Review of a Year 12 Major Examination Paper – 2015 HSC, Stage 6, Studies of Religion 1 Unit Exam - http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/hsc_exams/2015/exams/2015-hsc-sor-1.pdf

Two names that are repeatedly mentioned in sociological theory are Karl Marx and Max Weber. In some ways these two intellectuals were similar in the way they looked at society. There are also some striking differences. In order to compare and contrast these two individuals it is necessary to look at each of their ideas. Then a comparison of their views can be illustrated followed by examples of how their perspectives differ from each other.

On the 25th of April 1915, Australia took its first major step as a nation by sending soldiers off to fight in Gallipoli; these soldiers charged and fought their way through countless challenges, forging themselves a legend, but more importantly – forging Australia an identity. As time sparks controversy and scepticism, many begin to doubt the validity of the ANZAC legend. This opinion however, is unmistakably inaccurate as many diverse and credible sources document the ANZACS battle against their trials and tribulations as being heroic. The ANZACs endurance, mateship and courage are undoubtedly an accurate depiction of the ANZAC legend.

The present religious landscape in Australia is one that has changed significantly from 1945 up until now. Christianity is still currently the most popular religious tradition in Australia, however has seen a steady decrease in numbers due peoples interests in other religions and a non religious focused society. Due to immigration Australia has seen significant increases in followers of Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism. Because of Australia’s consumeristic society, denominational switching has become more common, especially in the Protestant denomination. New Age religions have become increasingly popular recently due to peoples search for individual fulfilment, in the form of happiness, health and meaning in life. Secularism in Australia is now a belief that forefronts society due to scientific discovery and individualism.

Australians fought in many wars, but the most successful war was thought to be ‘the war to end all wars’ (World War One). The Anzacs had experienced many hardships in this horrific war; special qualities were developed throughout the war such as endurance, mateship and courage. On the 25th of April the birth of the Anzac legend had risen. As they charged into enemy territories, in the early morning of the 1900s, they were destined to succeed despite the raining gun fire by the Turkish soldiers. Mateship, courage and endurance gradually strengthened deeper into the war; as a result, no one could take away these three imperishable qualities. Many historical records show many different perspectives about the Anzac legend. As a nation, we look upon three main attributes that the Anzacs had demonstrated courage, mateship and endurance. Therefore, the Anzac legacy continues to prosper in its purpose to motivate the modern Australian society.

“The driving need to celebrate the deeds of past serviceman and promote conceptions of national identity wrapped in the imagery of war have come to dominate our national discourse” (Stockings, n.d.) Professor Craig Stockings of ACSACS (Australian Centre for the Study of Armed Conflict and Society) states on the topic of the ANZAC myth. This quote is simply stating that WWI changed Australia’s views on war - in the way that we celebrate it as if it was the countries biggest victory. In truth, Australia’s outlook on war didn’t change in this perspective; our idea of the bronzed, larrikin soldier still stands strong. However, when World War II (WWII) rolled around, men didn’t want to enlis; they’d seen the detrimental health effects on soldiers and the many lives lost. War, in short, was no longer a celebratory thing then (Rush to enlist, n.d.). However, this year, the government spent millions of dollars on ANZAC celebration to fuel the, essentially, trivialisation of war - the ANZAC legend. (AWM, n.d.) Australia’s view on war changed in that we thought of it as a celebratory act in modern times - this proves, it was not justified because of the trivialisation that goes on in

Ordinarily, religion is one of the rationales of social orientations, that in one way or another influences the society’s social stability. This is because religion is the impelling force for regulations in the society as well as a destabilizing drive for transformation. Marx Weber together with Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim were very influential personalities in the course of the 19th century, and even now. In one way or another, these persons attempted to make plain as well as comprehensible social change, particularly in the aspect of religion in the society. Their perspectives on religion differ on some aspects. Even though their views on religion are diverse, they all seem to be in accord that

We all have some experience with religion. Whether our parents are religious, our own religious views, or others who try and convert you to a religion, we have all come in contact with a religion. But what do sociology and religion have to do with each other? The answer to this question is that religion meets sociology in the affects that it has on an individual or society (Schaefer, Richard T, 2009, pg 323).

Weber was concerned to demonstrate, contrary to Marx's thought, that culture was not reducible to the economic aspect of a society. Weber insisted that culture was to be considered as an autonomous value-sphere of any society. We might define such a value-sphere as; "..a distinct realm of activity which has its own inherent dignity and in which certain values, norms, obligations are inherent." (Brubaker:1983) Not only is this value-sphere of culture autonomous but, for Weber, it has the ability to construct forms of economic activity! For Weber, culture is seen as an agent in the production and maintenance of social relations. For