Download assess the sociological arguments and evidence that religion is a

ASSESS THE SOCIOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS AND EVIDENCE
THAT RELIGION IS A CONSERVATIVE FORCE IN SOCIETY BUT
MAY BE ASSOCIATED WITH SOCIAL CHANGE IN CERTAIN
CIRCUMSTANCES.
A number of sociologists argue that religion is a conservative force
in society˛ that is˛ it produces stability not change within society
and it reinforces the shared needs and values of society. £or
some sociologists this is a positive effect- the view of the
functionalist theorists˛ for some is a negative one - the view of the
Marxist theorists.
Emile Durkheim˛ a functionalist theorist˛ supports the view that
religion is a conservative force in society˛ reinforcing the existing
society of society. Durkheim‘s standard definition of religion was
based on a study of totemism amongst Australian aborigines. He
claimed ’Religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices
relative to sacred things˛ that is to say˛ things set apart and
forbidden- beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral
community called a church˛ all those who adhere to them‘. In
other words˛ he says that religion brings the tribe/group/society
together. Durkheim suggests that the totem is sacred because it is
symbolically representative of the group itself. It stands for the
values of the group and by worshipping itpeople are essentially
worshipping the group (society). Totemism is seen by Durkheim as
the most elementary form of religion involving rituals and
ceremonies around a totem which bring a group together. He
states that religion is not a matter of individual belief˛ it is about
collective rituals˛ ceremonies and worship which have the functions
of bringing together and defining the group.
Talcott Parsons states that religion gives meaning to life˛ religion
answers questions e.g. why do people suffer˛ die. Why do villains
prosper? Religion tests people‘s faith and claims if you‘re bad you
will get punished in the afterlife. Parsons also claims that religion
sacralises and legitimizes core values and norms. It provides core
values e.g.
Protestantism in the USA where the emphasis is on capitalism˛
individuality˛ democracy˛ self discipline and upward mobility.
Religion teaches society shared values such as the 5 pillars of Islam
and the 10 commandments.
Robert Bellah talks about civil religion - the belief that believing in
’America‘s God‘helps to unite the American people. He says that
Protestantism˛ Catholicism˛ Judaism and all other religions are
unified in the USA by belief in America‘s God. This God upholds
American values such as democracy˛ capitalism˛ individualism and
upward mobility.American civil religion includes supernatural
beliefs; an example would be American currency which states ’In
God we trust‘. US presidents swear an oath of allegiance before God
and ’God we trust‘ends US speeches.
Shils and Young explain the coronation in terms of how it
legitimizes core values and norms. They say that this is a
ceremonial occasion which affirmed the moral values by which
society lives by. The Queen confirms her promise to abide by the
rules of society such as mercy˛ charity and justice. People around the
country take part in the celebration; this equals solidarity and is
like a religious or sacred act.
£or functionalists religion is a positive action brought about by
society seeking order; The Marxist perspective mirrors in some
ways the functionalists take on religion. Marxist analysis of
religion is rooted in the understanding of religion and social
control.
For Marxist religion is also a conservative force in society. However
that conservative force is not a positive one for Marxists. Religion
legitimizes˛ reinforces and perpetuates the rule of the ruling class
and their interests. Karl Marx‘ famous quote states that religion
is the ’opium of the masses‘ as it dulls the working class‘ pain of
exploitation. He claims that religion is a sedative˛ a narcotic˛ which
dulls the people‘s experience of sensitivity to and understanding
of the difficulty of their life situation. This applies to the class who
are alienated by their life of production under capitalist
exploitation - the workers. £or the owners of production and
property˛ religion plays a different˛ but complementary role. It
serves as a tool to control the proletariatby giving them false hopes
such as promising future rewards˛ messianic hopes or a kind of
religious fatalism. It also serves to help owners of production
rationalise and justify their position of power and privilege.
Religion under these circumstances appears to take on the
character of an ideology. Such an ideology justifies and legitimizes
an unjust social order in such a way as to make it seem inevitable˛
pre-ordained and unchangeable. Religion promises some form of
salvation or reward in some other life conditional upon complete
acceptance of condition in this life˛ one‘s place in it and the
appointed places of other.
Another perspective on religion is the feminist one. feminists
argue that religion is a conservative force in society and prevents
social change˛ allowing the ongoing dominance of the patriarchy
and of male ideology within society˛ thus preventing women from
fully achieving equal rights. This is not a desirable effect for
feminists who say that women will not be equal while religion
plays an important part in society as it promotes the male
dominated existing social order.
However other sociologists argue that religion is a radical force in
society˛ causing conflict˛ a lack of stability and change within the
society which it is in operation in. Weber argues that religion is a
radical force in society - a force for change. Weber was a social
action theorist and emphasised that meanings (beliefs) and
motives direct human behaviour (action). Marx says that it is the
economic system that shapes or determines religious belief˛
Weber agrees that while this might sometimes be the case the
reverse could be true˛ i.e. religious beliefs can influence economic
behaviour˛ therefore producing social change. He sets out this
belief in his book˛ “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of
Capitalism". The key to understanding his work is the appreciation
that his real concern was with the relationship between ideas and
society.
Like Marx˛ he believes that ideas are important˛ however it is not
the ideas of the ruling class˛ but rather the religious ideas of
Calvinism and how these affect people‘s economic behaviour.
According to the Calvinist belief system wealth and the
accumulation of money and property was considered an outward
manifestation of God‘s favour and a sign that God had allocated a
place in heaven for that person. The Calvinist belief system
harboured a belief of pre-ordination within it˛ suggesting that the
’elect‘ have already been allocated their places in heaven and
people do not have free will to make their own choices as their
lives are predestined. This therefore created a great incentive to
live sober˛ hard working and worthy lives˛ to be sure of their place
in heaven - convince and prove to themselves that they are part of
the ’elect‘ by becoming wealthy. Calvinism encouraged abstinence
from pleasures of life and stipulated that money could not be
wasted on personal luxuries and therefore the only channel for it
was re-investment.
Weber argued that many people in the industrial north of Europe
were Calvinists and he concluded from this fact that the Calvinist
belief system had had a massive economic impact (was a radical
force) on society as it helped capitalism to start off. heo-Marxists
dispute Karl Marx‘s original position and agree with Weber in
saying that religion can produce social change. heo-Marxist Otto
Madurron claimed that religion is not necessarily a functional˛
reproductive or conservative factor in society. It is often one of
the main and sometimes the only available channel to bring
about a social revolution. This claim is demonstrated by looking
at; the hationalist and Loyalist Catholics and Protestants in
horthern Ireland˛ and the 1979 revolution in Iran when the Iranian
royal family was deposed and Iran was turned into a strict Islamic
fundamentalist state.
heo-Marist interpretations of religion are interested in exploring
the idea that religion can be used as a tool of resistance against class
based oppression; Antonio Gramsci is an Italian sociologist who saw
in his own country the power that the Catholic Church had over the
people and how the church was generally subservient to the State
and ruling class interests. However both Gramsci and Otto
Madurron claimed that working class intellectuals could use
loyalty to the church to put across the problems of the
oppressed. e.g. in Poland before the fall of communism˛ Latin
America and South America.
Madurron argues that most religions tend to take a traditional
and conservative line but some churches have undergone
significant internal reorganization which may fuel social change in
wider society. £or example˛ the hierarchy of most religions
tends to be recruited from elite groups. However˛ when clergy
are recruited from the subordinated class˛ conflict between
bishops and clergy can lead to the emergence of a more radical
religion. This seems to have been the case in relation to
liberation theology in Latin America. It grew out of discontent
with the first world idea that third world poverty could be
ended by aid from wealthier nations. Liberation ideology is
religious beliefs that the poor themselves should end their own
impoverishment. The Vatican was concerned that Liberation
theology analyses the condition of the poor in Marxist terms e.g.
father Comilo Torres˛ a Roman Catholic priest who encourages the
Columbian poor to join in a revolution to change the conditions.
In conclusion˛ although the likes of Durkheim and Marx provide
very good evidence of how Religion may act as a Conservative force˛
once you consider modern examples such as Islamic fundamentalism
and the apparent process of secularization it seems that religion
is maintaining nothing like Durkheim and Marx described. If
Religion is maintaining anything then it seems to be conflict˛ can
this be viewed as part of the conservative force?