Beliefs In Society REVISION

Substantive definition:

• Based on the belief in God or the Supernatural.

• A religion has to have a belief in God or Supernatural.

• Exclusive definition, which means not everything can be considered a religion.

Evaluation:

• Fails to recognise other beliefs and practices (such as yoga, crystals, etc) that perform the same functions as religion does, but don’t have a belief in God.

• Deemed ethnocentric/western biased and don’t include religions such as Buddhism, which don’t have the western idea of a ‘God’.

Functional definition:

• Based on the social and psychological functions that religion performs for an individual or society

• Durkheim defines religion in terms of the contribution it makes towards social solidarity, rather than an individual belief in God or the supernatural.

• Yinger believes that religion answers ‘ultimate questions’ about the meaning of life and what happens after we die.

• Inclusive definition, which means no western bias etc…

Evaluation:

• However, just because an institution helps integrate people into groups doesn’t mean it’s a religion.

• E.g. Football includes group chanting, a uniform, etc… Which gives people a sense of community and integration. That doesn’t mean that football is a religion.

Constructionist definition:

• Social Constructionists take an interpretivist approach that focuses on how the individual defines religion.

• Religion cannot be encompassed by a single universal definition, it means different things to different people.

• Social constructionists are interested in how definitions of religion are constructed, challenged and fought over.

• E.g. Aldridge found that Scientology members believed it was a religion, whereas governments denied its legal status and even wanted to ban it. This shows that definitions of religion can be contested, and are influenced by whoever has power to define the situation.

• Social Constructionists don’t assume that religion always means a belief in God or the supernatural, neither do they believe in it performing functions for society.

• Their approach allows them to delve into the meanings that people attach to religion themselves.

Evaluation:

• However, this makes it impossible to generalise about the nature of a religion, since people may have different views about what counts as a religion.

Functionalist theories of religion

• Functionalists believe in organic analogy - Society is like a human body & each institution plays a different part and meets its needs.(like organs).

• Societies most basic need is the need for social order and solidarity, so everyone can cooperate.

• A value consensus makes this possible, a set of shared norms and values by which everyone lives by.

• Without value consensus, society would fall apart and into a state of normlessness- anomie.

• Religion plays a key part in maintaining status quo and value consensus.

Durkheim:

• For Durkheim, he believed that each religion had a fundamental distinction between the sacred, and the profane.

• The sacred are things set apart, and forbidden.

• The profane are everyday, mundane things that have no significance.

• He believes that religion isn’t just a set of beliefs, but has definitive rituals or practices in relation to the ‘sacred’.

• These rituals are ‘collective’, performed by social groups.

• The fact that sacred things evoke such powerful feelings in believers suggests that these symbols are representing none other than society itself.

• Since society is the only thing powerful enough to command such feelings.

• When they worship the sacred symbols, Durkheim argues that they are worshipping society itself.

• Although sacred symbols vary from religion to religion, they all perform the essential function of uniting believers into a single, moral community.

Totemism:

• Durkheim believed that the essence of all religion could be found by studying its simplest form, in its simplest society, i.e. clan society.

• He used ‘Arunta’, an Aboriginal Australian Tribe, with a clan system.

• Arunta clans consist of bands of kin, who come together to perform the worship of the sacred totem.

• The totem is the clans emblem, and the shared rituals serve to reinforce the groups sense of belonging and community.

• For Durkheim, when clan members worship their totemic animal, they are in reality worshipping society- even though they are not aware of it.

• The totem invokes feelings of awe as it represents the power of the society on which the individual is ‘utterly dependent’ on.

Evaluation:

• The evidence of totemism is not very reliable. (unsound)

• Worsley notes that there is no sharp division between the sacred & profane, and that different clans share the same totems.

• Even if Durkheim is right about totemism, this does not prove that he has discovered the essence of every other religion.

Collective Conscience

• In Durkheim’s view, the sacred symbols represent societies ‘collective consciousness’’.

• The collective consciousness is the shared norms, values, beliefs and knowledge that make social life and cooperation between individuals in a society possible, without this, society would fall into a state of normlessness.

• For Durkheim, regular shared religious rituals reinforce the collective conscience and maintain social solidarity.

• Participating in these binds individuals together, reminding them that they are part of something bigger than themselves, and they owe their loyalty and devotion to this community.

• It also reminds the individuals of the power of society, to which without , we would be nothing, and to which we owe everything.

• In this sense, religion performs an important function for the individual, by making us feel part of something greater than ourselves, religion reinvigorates and strengthens us to face life’s trials and tribulations, and motivates us to overcome obstacles that would otherwise defeat us.

Evaluation:

• Durkheims theory may apply better to smaller scale societies with a single religion, but it is difficult to apply it to large scale societies or postmodern/cosmopolitan societies.

• His theory may explain social integration, but not the conflicts between them.

• E.g. Religion has caused conflict in communities such as: Palestine & Israel, Northern Ireland where Catholics were discriminated against, Kashmir (india vs pakistan, hindus vs muslims)

Cognitive functions of religion:

• In Durkheim’s view, religion is the origin of the concepts and categories that we need for reasoning, understanding the world and communicating.

• In their book, ‘Primitive Classification’, Durkheim and Mauss argue that religion provides basic categories such as time, space and causation. E.g. The Quran having scientific miracles in it, Bible speaking about how god made the world, etc…

• According to Durkheim, Religion is the origin of human thought, reason & science.

Evaluation:

• Postmodernists such as Mestrovic would argue that Durkheim’s ideas cannot be applied to contemporary society as increasing diversity has fragmented the collective conscience, there is no longer a single shared value system for religion to reinforce.

Psychological Functions

• Malinowski agrees with Durkheim that religion promotes social cohesion

• It does so by performing psychological functions for the individuals, to cope with emotional stress that, if not dealt with correctly, would undermine social solidarity. (sometimes, people with difficulties or mental health issues may turn to crime & deviance to serve a psychological function.)

• Malinowski identifies two types of situations where religion does this:

• Where the outcome is important but uncontrollable & thus uncertain.

• E.g. Canoe Magic & the Trobriand islanders- They did rituals before Ocean fishing as it was dangerous and they didn’t know if the fishers would come back alive, but wouldn’t do rituals before lagoon fishing as it wasn’t dangerous & the outcome was predictable.

• At times of life crises

• Events such as death, birth, puberty, marriage and sickness, etc… all mark major changes in social groups.

• Religion helps to minimise disruption.

• E.g. Funeral Rituals or contemporary example: CoVid & the rise in religiosity.

• Malinowski argues that death is the main reason for the existence of religious belief, as it provides an explanation for what happens after death, and comforts and assures believers.

Parsons: Values & meaning

• Agrees with Malinowski

Parsons identifies two other essential functions that religion performs in society:

• It creates and legitimates society’s central values

• It is the primary source of meaning

• Religion creates and legitimates societies basic norms and values by sacralising them. (making them sacred)

• In the USA, protestantism has sacralised the core American values of individualism, meritocracy & self-discipline.

• This serves to promote value-consensus and thus, social stability.

• Religion also provides a source of meaning, as it answers ‘ultimate questions’ about the world. (Such as why the good suffer & some people die young).

• Such events defy our sense of justice, and make life appear meaningless, which may undermine our commitment to society.

• Therefore, religion provides answers to these questions, such as explaining that suffering is a test of faith, and that they will be rewarded in heaven.

• By doing so, religion enables people to adjust to adverse events of circumstances and helps maintain stability.

Civil Religion

• Like Parsons, Bellah is interested in how religion unifies society.

• He looked into the multi - faith society of America, and found that what unifies America, is an overarching, ‘civil religion’.

• A civil religion is a belief system that attaches sacred qualities to society itself.

• In American society, civil religion is a faith in ‘Americanism’ or ‘the American way of life’.

• Bellah argues that civil religion integrates society in a way that America’s many churches and denominations cannot.

• While no religion can claim complete authority over all Americans, Civil religion can.

• American civil religion involves loyalty to the state and a belief in God, both of which are equated with being a ‘true American’. (They also have aspects of nationalism and patriotism).

• It is expressed in various ‘rituals’ such as singing the national anthem, the pledge of alleigance to the flag, the Lincoln memorial and phrases such as ‘One nation under God’.

• However, this is not a specific catholic or protestant or jewish God but rather an ‘American God’.

• It sacralises the American way of life and binds together all Americans from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds.

Functional alternatives

• Functional alternatives or functional equivalents to religion are non-religious beliefs and practices that perform functions similar to those of an organised religion. (Reinforcing shared values and maintaining social cohesion).

• Although in America, civil religion involves a belief in God, Bellah argues that this doesn’t have to be the case.

• Some other belief system could perform the same functions.

• E.g. Nazi Germany & the Soviet Union had secular (non-religious) political beliefs and rituals around which they sought to unite society.

Evaluation:

• However, the problem with the idea of functional alternatives is the same with functional definitions of religion.

• It ignores what makes religion distinctive and different, i.e. its belief in the supernatural.

Evaluation of functionalism as a whole

Functionalism emphasises the social nature of religion and the positive function it performs, but neglects negative aspects such as religion being a source of oppression of the poor, or women. (marxist & feminist)

It ignores religion as a source of division and conflict (as used by the British in India & Pakistan, divide & conquered and separated the land based on religion, causing HUGE conflict, to this day).

Especially in complex modern societies where there is more than one religion. E.g. Northern Ireland.

Where there is Religious pluralism, it is hard to see how it can actually unite people and promote social solidarity.

The idea of civil religion overcomes this problem to some extent, by arguing that societies may still have an overarching belief system shared by all, but is this really religion? especially as it is not based on a belief in the supernatural or God.

Marxist theories of religion

Unlike functionalists, who see society based on harmony and value consensus, Marxism (a conflict theory) see all societies as divided into two classes.

The bourgeoisie, and the proletariat. (The ruling class and the working class)

The RC exploit the labour of the WC

In such a society, there is always the potential for class conflict, and Marx predicted that the working class would ultimately become conscious of their exploitation and unit to overthrow capitalism. This would bring into being a classless society in which there would be no more exploitation.

Marx’s theory needs to be seen in the context of this general view of society.

There will be no need for religion in a classless society and it will disappear.

Religion as ideology

Ideology is a belief system that distorts people’s perception of reality in ways that serve the interests of the ruling class.

He argues that if the class controls economic production, whats to say they aren’t controlling the spread of ideas to only transmit one’s that benefit them!

He believes that the ruling class does this through the ISA, ideological state apparatus, institutions such as the family, the church, the media, the education system and of course, religion.

Religion is an ideological weapon to legitimate the suffering of the poor as something inevitable and ‘God-given’.

Religion misleads the poor into believing that their suffering is virtuous, and that they will be compensated for it in the afterlife.

E.g. According to christianity, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.

Such ideas create a false consciousness- a distorted view of reality that prevents the poor from acting to change their situation.

Lenin describes religion as ‘spiritual gin’,- an intoxicant doled out to the masses by the ruling class in order to confuse them and keep them in their place.

In Lenin’s view, the ruling class cynically use religion to manipulate the working class and prevent them from overthrowing the ruling class by creating a ‘mystical fog’ that obscures reality.

Religion also legitimates the power and privilege of the dominant class by making their position appear to be ‘divinely ordained’ or ‘God Chosen’.

E.g. In the 16th century, there was the idea of the Divine right of Kings, which was the idea that the king was God’s representative on earth, and is owed total obedience.

Disobedience to higher authority isn’t just illegal, but also a cardinal sin towards God’s authority.

A KEY EXAMPLE of Religion & the Legitimation of inequality is the Caste system in India.

The Hindu Caste system is a system of social stratification based on ascribed status. You are born into the same caste as your parents and marriage between castes is forbidden. The highest caste’s is that of the priests and intellectuals, then the warriors, then the merchants and traders, then the lowest caste of labourers and servants. Below this hierarchy is a separate box, not even touching the other castes, called the untouchables, this group of people are not even considered to have a caste & are deemed unworthy of even being touched or spoken to. (Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, Shudras, & then the Dalits).

The Hindu doctrine of karma teaches that if you behave well in this world by accepting and observing the rules of caste, after death you will be reincarnated into a higher caste. These rules include strict norms about purity and impurity, governing what type of food may be eaten and what social contact is allowed between different castes. Higher castes must maintain higher levels of purity. E.g. Touching someone of the lower caste may be seen as polluting and must be followed by elaborate cleansing rituals.

The doctrines of reincarnation and karma serve to maintain inequality by assuring those at the bottom of the caste system that their obedience will be rewarded (or disobedience, punished) by reincarnation to a higher (or lower) caste. Meanwhile, higher castes perceive their privileged positions as a reward for their virtue in a previous life.

Religion & Alienation

Marx sees religion as the product of alienation

Alienation is being separated and losing control over something that one has produced or created.

Alienation exists in all class societies but is more extreme under capitalism.

Workers are alienated because they do not own what they produce and have no control over the production process, therefore they can’t express their nature as creative beings.

Alienation reaches a peak with the detailed division of labour where the worker endlessly repeats the same minute task, devoid of any meaning or skill.

In these dehumanising conditions, the exploited turn to religion as a form of consolation.

As Marx says, ‘Religion is the opium of the people’

Religion acts as an opiate to dull the pain of exploitation

But it only masks the pain, rather than treating its cause.

Because religion is a distorted view of the world, it can offer no solution to earthly misery, only the afterlife, which creates an illusory happiness that distracts attention from the true source of their suffering, namely capitalism.

Thus, Marx sees religion as the product of alienation.

It arises out of suffering & acts as a consolation for it, but fails to deal with its cause (class exploitation).

Religion also acts as an ideology that legitimates the suffering of the working class and the privilege of the ruling class.

Evaluation

Marx shows how religion may be a tool of oppression that masks exploitation and creates a false consciousness, however he ignores positive functions of religion such as the psychological function to help in misfortune.

Neo-Marxists see certain forms of religion as assisting, not hindering the development of class consciousness.

Althusser (a marxist himself) rejects the concept of alienation as it is ‘unscientific’ and based on a romantic idea that humans have a ‘true self’. This would make the concept not suitable for a theory of religion,

Religion does not necessarily function effectively as an ideology to control the population.

Abercrombie, et al (Hill & Turner) argue that in pre-capitalist society, while Christianity was a major element of ruling class ideology, it only had a limited impact on the peasantry.

Feminist theories of religion

Feminists regard religion as a patriarchal institution that reflect and perpetuate gender inequality.

Religion is a function of patriarchal ideology that legitimates female subordination.

Evidence of patriarchy

Although the teachings of religion stress gender equality, there is a lot of evidence suggesting otherwise:

Religious organisations are mainly male-dominated despite the fact that women participate more than men in these organisations.

E.g. Orthodox Judaism and Catholicism forbid women from being priests.

Armstrong sees exclusion of priesthood as evidence of womens marginalisation.

Places of worship often segregate the sexes and marginalise women

E.g. Seating women behind screens while men occupy the central/more sacred places.

Women’s participation is restricted

E.g. Not being able to preach or read sacred texts.

Taboos that regard menstruation, pregnancy and childbirth as ‘polluting’ may also prevent participation,

E.g. In islam, menstruating women are not allowed to touch the Quran. In hinduism, menstruating women cannot enter the temple.

Jean Holm describes this as the devaluation of women in religion.

Sacred texts

These texts largely feature the doings of male gods, prophets, etc… Often written and interpreted by men. Stories that reflect anti-female stereotypes are stories such as Adam and Eve, who caused humanities fall from grace and expulsion from the garden of Eden.

Evaluation:

In some texts such as in the sacred Hindu scriptures, there is a high amount of Female gods that are revered and praised and considered almighty. Kali/Durga, etc… & Greek Mythology as well!

Religious laws & customs

These may give women fewer rights than men

E.g. In access to divorce, how many spouses they can marry, decision making, dress codes, etc…

Contemporary example: Iran post islamic revolution, Afghanistan post taliban.

Religious influences on cultural norms may lead to unequal treatment.

E.g. Genital mutilation , punishment for sexual transgressions. (Around the world, over 230 million girls and women have been cut. Africa accounts for the largest share of this total, with over 144 million. Asia follows with over 80 million, and a further 6 million are in the Middle East)

Many religions legitimate and regulate women’s traditional domestic & reproductive role.

E.g. The Catholic church bans abortion & artificial contraception,

Woodhead argues that the exclusion of women from the Catholic priesthood is evidence of the Church’s deep unease of the general emancipation of women.

However, feminists argue that women have not always been subordinate to men in religion.

Armstrong argues that early religions often placed women at the centre.

E.g. earth mother goddesses, fertility goddesses, female priesthoods, etc… were found throughout the Middle East until about 6,000 years ago.

However, about 4,000 ago, following the rise of monotheistic religions, the world saw the establishment of a single, all-powerful male God. (Such as the Hebrews Jehovah, & male prophets such as Abraham/Ibrahim, the first prophet of Judaism,Christianity & Adam the first man & first prophet in Islam.

Nawal el Saadawi argues that whilst religion may be used to oppress women, it isn’t the root cause of their oppression.

Rather, it is patriarchy that has come about in the last few thousand years. Due to patriarchies existence, men began to interpret & reinterpret religions that favoured patriarchy, thus religion is now a factor that contributes to women’s oppression.

Like Armstrong, El Saadawi sees the rise of monotheism as legitimating the power of men over women.

Islam isn’t inherently patriarchal, just happens to be dominant religion in more patriarchal societies.

The stained-glass ceiling refers to limiting women's access to positions of authority and power within various religious institutions and systems.

Religious forms of feminism

Woodhead criticises feminist explanations that equate religion with patriarchy

Not true for all religions

Woodhead argues that there are religious forms of feminism

Woodhead uses the example of the hijab worn by many muslim women.

While western feminists tend to see it as a symbol of oppression, to the wearer it may be a means of liberation.

Sophie Gilliat-Ray states that some young British Muslim women choose to wear the hijab in order to gain parental approval to enter further education and especially employment, where Muslim women’s presence has traditionally been problematic,

For them, the hijab is a symbol of liberation that allows them to enter the public sphere without being condemned as immodest.

Women also use religion to gain status and respect for their roles within the private sphere of home and family.

E.g. Brusco found that in Columbia, belonging to a Pentecostal group is empowering for some women, despite the strict gender rules imposed by such groups, women are able to use religion to increase their power and influence.

E.g. A strongly held belief amongst Pentecostals is to influence mens behaviour by insisting that they practice what they preach and refrain from ‘macho’ behaviour. Similarly, women make use of activities linked to the church such as bible study groups to share experiences and find support. This is the Pentecostal Gender Paradox.

Piety Movements

Rinaldo sees this pattern as typical of ‘piety movements’.

These are conservative movements that support traditional teachings about women’s role, modest dress, prayer and bible study. They include pentecostal and evangelical groups and even sometimes non Christian groups.

Like Brusco & Woodhead, Rinaldo argues that even within conservative religions, women may sometimes find ways to further their own interests.

However, she notes that it is mainly middle-class urban women who are most likely to join Piety Movements, as they have other resources and good education & income that help them pursue their goals.

Liberal Protestant Organisations

Such as the Quakers, and the unitarians, are often committed to gender equality and women playing leading roles.

E.g. 1/3 of Unitarian ministers are female.

The Church of England has had female priests since 1992 & female bishops since 2015.

Over 1/5 of its priests are female.