The Temple Is An Age Year Old Student At Williams College From Sierra Leone

In The Sacred Quest, University of Notre Dame professor Lawrence Cunningham attempts the search for a coherent definition of religion. While he doesn’t strive for a one-sentence interpretation of what indicates a real, organized religion, he arrives on several elements and functions to give meaning to his definition. To Cunningham, there are five elements that make up a religion: belief, feeling, action, individual and community aspects, and values. Cunningham argues that these five elements exists in order to explain what could not otherwise be explained, enable people to sustain hope in the face of difficult experiences, and provide ways of thinking that provide goals and respond to “great problems” in life (158). All of these aspects work

Ideas do not prove their value until they withstand the challenge of being questioned. On the surface, professor Craig Martin and anthropologist Clifford Geertz approach analyzing religion with opposing views. Martin dismisses definitions of religion claiming that no definition can encompass the practical use of the word and instead provides a step by step approach to explaining beliefs and actions in the perspective of a methodological atheist. Geertz, however, provides a working definition broken into a five-part model to make it a useful tool. Upon further analysis of these two methods, the once contradicting ideas begin to work in unison with each other. Martin’s functionalist approach and the definition

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.

In William James’s The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature and Émile Durkheim’s Elementary Forms of Religious life, the societal implications of religion are examined and analyzed. James and Durkheim possess fairly similar methodologies in their approaches to religion. Both scholars examine religious phenomena based on the experience on the participants. For both of them the “religious experience is the point of departure for formulating a theory of religion” (Joas). James refutes “medical materialism” (James, 19) and argues that it is the extreme cases of religious fervor where true religious experiences will be found and Durkheim introduces his theory on “collective effervescence” (Durkheim, 226) and the experiences

For purpose of this essay, religion will be defined as a collection of institutional beliefs and customs concerning humanity and the purpose of the universe [1]. Key beliefs within religion that will be explored, as well as there relation to reason, are:

Religion and faith play numerous roles in people’s lives. From being a unifying factor to alienating people, and from comforting people to terrifying others, the roles of religion is vast and boundless. In The Crucible and “Upon the Burning of Our House”, it is evident that religion and faith play a subconscious role in the lives of people by acting as an inner conscience and by giving people a spiritual peace of mind.

Nye discusses the term “religion” twice as a noun, once as an adjective, and once as a verb. One noun represents religion as a “universal” aspect of humanity, the other noun signifies a specific religion, the adjective form describes a behavior or experience, and the verb is the act of practicing, itself. The various meanings of the term “religion” as demonstrated by these parts of speech set up the basis for the fact that religion has a multitude of implications. Nye focuses on these complexities, and, in particular, draws attention to religion’s variations cross-culturally. He writes how even within the same religion, religious practices and beliefs can differ greatly. He also explains how the word “religion” itself is difficult to translate into other languages, and some cultures do not even have a word for it. Nevertheless, Nye argues that, rather than the as a term, religion can be translated globally in terms of the kind of life it prescribes.

The identity of human kind seems intrinsically linked with a search for the divine. Since the beginning of time, we have contemplated and proposed many different interpretations of the supernatural and existence of a divine being(s). In Karen Armstrong’s book, The Case for God, she assembles an exhaustive and detailed account of the history of all major religions and their historical significance and similarities. She concludes with an admonition of a modern atheist attitude towards religion based on the idea that we, as a democratic society, have lost sight of the overall intention and nature of belief and religion. Her perspective is unique and she adds an interesting new alternative to complete atheism and traditional religion.

The topic of religion is a never ending battle. There are those who take it as God’s word; others who simply see the historical value of scripture; and finally those who fail to see any positivity in religion and consider it outdated and unnecessary. To examine these stances is to truly begin to unravel years of debate but it is important to understand where this information is coming from.

Religion emerges from the human susceptibility for protection and use it as a tool for liberation from the bitter realities and perplexities of the world. “Religious ideas are teachings and pronouncements about facts and states of external (or internal) reality that convey something one has not discovered for oneself and which assert the right to be believed” (Freud 88). We must object to religious claims because there is no proof to substantiate them and merely ideas we follow for generations. Religious ideas are beyond the control of reasoning, as if we don’t validate our beliefs and behave that our beliefs have a substantial basis of support. Religious ideas are teachings, not the thought that

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.

Sociologist Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) described religion as ‘a unified system of beliefs and practices (…) which unite into one single moral community called a Church’: for him, ‘the idea of religion is inseparable from that of the Church’ (Durkheim cited in Harvey, 2013, p. 8). This definition fits well with established religion in the past – a strong cohesive force within society, bounding its members together, most often centralised and institutionalised (as the Roman Catholic Church). By contrast, in our modern society, individual choices tend to be prevalent in religious matters, allowing people to freely shift their religious affiliation or even build up their own spirituality – a trend sometimes labelled ‘the privatisation of religion’. People are increasingly

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

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

Durkheim’s analysis of religion was developed using principles of positivism and organicism (Hamilton 2014, p. 104). Positivism and methodological individualism were both consequences of liberal extremism, with their roots in the political philosophy of the Enlightenment. During this period philosophy began to associate with science and rationality, leading to the creation of the social sciences (Hamilton 2014, pp. 103-104). In contrast, organicism was largely conservative and influenced by theology. This view explains that society is a divine creation; a transcendent and unwavering phenomenon (Hamilton 2014, p. 104). Durkheim combined these two traditions to develop his theory of knowledge and religion. By treating religion as a collective social experience, Durkheim positioned his analysis of human thought within the social environment (Hamilton 2014, p. 103; Repstad & Furseth 2013, p. 32; Turner 2010, p. 54). Essentially, Durkheim regarded religion as a secondary form of scientific knowledge; a mental process linking human activity to the natural environment (Hamilton 2014, p. 103). He maintained that religion permeates into all areas of human life. Further, it divides society into sacred and profane areas that guide an individual (Hamilton 2014, p. 105). Durkheim’s use of the term sacred signifies religious articles and actions, and the participation in religious rituals. On the other hand, profane denotes all other areas of life outside of religion known as