Beliefs in society Flashcards
What is a belief system?
A belief system can broadly be defined as a framework of ideas through which an individual makes sense of the world.
Belief systems make knowledge-claims: they claim that they are giving us facts about how things are.
A belief system can more generally be seen as an umbrella term for any organised set of ideas and principles
Are all religions in the world belief systems?
Although religions are major belief systems that make claims about what the world is like and how we ought to act in it, they are not the only belief systems to do this
Political ideologies e.g. socialism, communism, conservativism make claims about how society ought to be organised. Similarly, although science doesn’t tell us how we should behave, it does claim to tell us about how the world is e.g. a narrative.
Explain what is meant by an ideology
A simple definition of ideology is that it is a set of beliefs and/or principles. Ideologies then, are just one type of belief system. However, more generally, belief systems are popularly associated with collections of ideas that have a religious basis, whereas ideology is regarded as a secular term.
How did Karl Popper (1945) describe ideologies ?
Karl Popper (1945) described ideologies as ‘secular religions’, for they too contain both descriptive and normative elements. For example, Marxism can be interpreted as an ideology that sees capitalist society as characterised by conflict and inequalities. Marxists believe that this is morally wrong and that resources should be shared out equally. Therefore, an ideology is usually taken to mean a particular set of political and economic beliefs.
Why is there a negative description/perception of the word ideology within sociology?
Ideology is often used as a negative description of someone else’s world view. For example, Feminists would not use the term ‘ideology’ to describe their own ideas. Similarly, Marx saw his explanation of society as scientific fact, not an ideology. He reserved the term ‘ideology’ for what he saw as the false, distorted views that were used by the ruling class to mystify the masses.
How did Marx and Marxists use the term idealogy?
Marxists use the term ideology to refer to a set of ruling class ideas that serve the interests of the dominant group by justifying their privileged position. The elite maintain their powerful position in society by keeping the working classes blind to the reality of their situation. Ideology in this sense, involves one social group dominating another.
What is ideology not viewed as?
Ideologies are not viewed as neutral beliefs or ideas that usually claim a monopoly on truth. In sociology the concept has taken on a number of related meanings.
State the negative aspects of idealogy
ideology has negative aspects such as the following:
· Distorted, false, one-sided or a biased view of reality
· Ideas that conceal the interests of a particular group or that legitimate their privileges
· Ideas that prevent change by misleading people about the reality of the situation they are in or about their own true interests or position
· A self-sustaining belief system that is irrational and closed to criticism.
Explain ideology from a Marxist perspective (ruling class ideology)
From a Marxist perspective, ruling class ideology includes ideas and beliefs such as the following:
· That equality will never work because it goes against ‘human nature’
· Victim blaming ideas about poverty, such as what Bowles and Gintis (1976) call ‘the poor are dumb’ theory of meritocracy: everyone has an equal chance in life, so the poor must be poor because they are stupid or lazy – not because of capitalism
· Racist ideas about the inferiority of ethnic minorities which divide black and white workers and make them easier to rule
· Nationalist ideas that workers and capitalists of one nation have more in common than do the workers of the world
What is the significance of ruling class ideology to Marxists?
Marxists argue that the ideas of the ruling class become the dominant ideas in society and they function to prevent change by creating a false consciousness. Despite these ideological barriers, Marx believes that ultimately the working class will develop a true class consciousness and unite to overthrow capitalism.
How did Gramsci develop Marx’s ideas of ruling class ideology further?
Marx’s ideas are developed further by the neo-Marxist Gramsci (1971). He refers to the ruling class ideological domination of society as hegemony. Gramsci argues that the working class can develop ideas that challenge ruling class hegemony. This is because in capitalist society workers have a dual consciousness – a mixture of ruling class ideology and ideas they develop from their own direct experience of exploitation and their struggles against it. It is therefore possible for the working class to develop class consciousness and overthrow capitalism.
However, Gramsci argues that this requires a political party of ‘organic intellectuals’ – workers who through their anti-capitalist struggles have developed a class consciousness and can spread it throughout the working class.
Why have Marx and Gramsci been criticised for their perspective on ideology
Some critics argue that it is not the existence of a dominant ideology that keeps the workers in line or prevents attempts to overthrow capitalism. Abercrombie et al (1980) argue that it is economic factors such as the fear of unemployment that keeps workers from rebelling.
Explain the neo-Marxist perspective on ideology
Much of MANNHEIM’S work on ideology was done between the two World Wars (1918-1939) – a time of intense political and social conflict. This undoubtedly influenced his views. Mannheim (1929) sees all belief systems as a partial or one-sided worldview. Their one-sidedness results from being the viewpoint of one particular group or class and its interests. He distinguishes between 2 broad types of belief system or world view.
What 2 broad types of belief systems or world views did Manheim distinguish between?
Ideological thought: justifies keeping things as they are. It reflects the position and interests of privileged groups who benefit from the maintenance of the status quo. Their belief system therefore tends to be conservative and favours hierarchy.
Utopian thought: justifies social change. It reflects the position and interests of the underprivileged and offers a vision of how society could be organized differently. Mannheim sees Marxism as an example of utopian thought.
According Manheim, what did these worldviews create?
Mannheim sees these worldviews as creations of groups of intellectuals who attach themselves to particular classes or social groups. However, because these intellectuals represent the interests of particular groups and not society as a whole, they only produce partial views of reality. The belief system of each class or group only gives us a partial truth about the world. For Mannheim, this is a source of conflict in society. Different intellectuals, linked to different groups and classes produce opposed and antagonistic ideas that justify the interests and claims of their group as against others.
What was Manheim’s solutions to the belief systems of each class causing social conflict within society
For Mannheim, the solution is to ‘detach’ the intellectuals from the social groups they represent and create a non-aligned or ‘free-floating intelligentsia’ standing above the conflict. Freed from representing the interests of groups they would be able to synthesize elements of the different partial ideologies and utopias so as to arrive at a ‘total’ world view that represented the interests of society as a whole.
However, the problem being, that many of the elements of different ideologies are diametrically opposed to one another and it is therefore very hard to imagine how these could be synthesized.
Contrast the Marxist and Feminist perspective on ideology
Marxists see class division as the basis of ideologies justifying inequality. By contrast, feminists see gender inequality as the fundamental division and patriarchal ideology as playing a key role in legitimating it. Because gender difference is a feature of all societies, there exist many different ideologies to justify it.
Supporting the feminist perspective on ideology, how does sociologist Mark and Oakley explain how patriarchal ideology plays a role in gender divisions?
Feminists see gender inequality as the fundamental division and patriarchal ideology as playing a key role in legitimating it. Because gender difference is a feature of all societies, there exist many different ideologies to justify it.
For example, MARKS (1979) describes how ideas from science have been used to justify excluding women from education. He quotes (19th (male) doctors, scientists and educationalists expressing the view that educating females would lead to the creation of ‘unfeminine’ females and ‘disqualify women from their true vocation’, namely the nurturing of the next generation. OAKLEY (1972) argues that John Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation (1951) is a good example of science acting as an ideology. This justified gender inequality in the workplace by claiming that the development of young children was ‘damaged’ by working mothers. It strengthened the patriarchal idea that only men should be breadwinners and that women should stay at home with their children.
Why do feminists argue that patriarchal ideologies found in science, are also found in religious beliefs and practices ?
In additional to patriarchal ideologies in science, those embodied in religious beliefs and practices have also been used to define women as inferior. There are numerous examples from a wide range of religions of the idea that women are ritually impure or unclean, particularly because of childbirth or menstruation. This has given rise to purification rituals such as ‘churching’ after a woman has given birth. In some Christian churches, a new mother may not receive communion until after she has been churched. However, not all elements of religious belief systems subordinate women. For example, there is evidence that in the early history of the Middle East, Europe and Asia, before the emergence of the monotheistic patriarchal religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam), matriarchal religions with female deities were widespread, with female priests and the celebration of fertility cults. Similarly, in Hinduism, goddesses have often been portrayed as mothers or creators of the universe
Explain the postmodernist perspective on religion and ideology
Postmodernists such as LYOTARD (1984) claim that religion and science are metanarratives. These ideologies, which seek to explain ‘truth’, are no longer relevant due to the fragmentation of society. Because knowledge is relative to the individual, scientific facts and religious teachings are no longer automatically accepted as ‘truth’ in the postmodern world.
Explain the impact of science throughout history
Many sociologists see modern science as a product of the process of rationalisation that began with the Protestant reformation of the 16th
Many believe it has undermined religion by changing the way we think and how we see the world
Science has undoubtedly had an enormous impact on society over the last few centuries
Its success has led to a widespread ‘faith in science’ - a belief that it can ‘deliver the goods’
What is a key feature of science that distinguishes it from belief systems/knowledge-claims
The key feature distinguishing it from other belief systems and knowledge-claims is its cognitive power
In other words, it enables us to explain, predict and control the world in a way that non-scientific or pre-scientific belief systems cannot
Explain what is meant by an open belief system?
An open belief system refers to a science that is said to be apart of an open belief system. This means that scientific knowledge is provisional, it is open to challenge and potentially disprovable (falsification). Therefore, scientific knowledge can change - it is relative, not fixed
Explain what is CUDOS norms according to Merton
Merton (1973) argued that the changes brought about by the Protestant Reformation provided the climate for science to thrive. He argued that science as an organised social activity has a set of norms.
(CUDOS) that promote growth of knowledge by encouraging openness:
Communism, Universalism, Disinterestedness and Organised Scepticism
Explain communism in relation to Merton’s CUDOS norms
Communism - Knowledge is not private property, it must be shared with the scientific community - this is essential so that knowledge can grow
Explain universalisms in relation to Merton’s CUDOS norms
Universalism - Scientific knowledge is judged by universal objective criteria (testing), not just by the specific culture or community that produce it
Explain Disinterestedness in relation to Merton’s CUDOS norms
Disinterestedness - Seeking knowledge for its own sake being objective. Scientific findings are published and open to scrutiny
Explain Organised Scepticism in relation to Merton’s CUDOS norms
Organised Scepticism - Every theory is open to criticism and testing. Knowledge is not regarded as sacred
What do postmodernists mean by a ‘metanarrative’?
Before the development of science, people used different ways of gaining knowledge of the world. Every culture throughout history has had its own knowledge system, usually taking the form of a religious belief system. The result was that the knowledge possessed by each society was accepted only within those cultural boundaries. Postmodernists call these bodies of knowledge, narratives. There are many narratives in the world, but in the past, one narrative traditionally dominated each culture. Postmodernists call this a metanarrative, a single comprehensive explanation of the world. Each culture was sure that their knowledge was the truth, founded on tradition and faith
What is meant by ‘scientific rationalism’ ?
Since the Enlightenment and the development of scientific rationalism, it has been argued that there is an objective truth that transcends all culture-specific knowledge. It is claimed that the scientific method can provide factual evidence of reality, which religion cannot. What makes the scientific method of gaining knowledge superior is that it is objective, whereas all culture-specific methods, meaning religions and traditional wisdom are subjective.
Explain the scientific method of gaining information?
What makes the scientific method of gaining knowledge superior is that it is objective, whereas all culture-specific methods, meaning religions and traditional wisdom are subjective.
The scientific method involves observation of the natural world, the formulation of a hypothesis based on this observation and the systematic testing of this hypothesis to try to gain evidence to support it. If evidence is gained to support the hypothesis, it may consequently be viewed as fact. Science is a superior metanarrative that shows all other explanations to be false
What do rationalists argue that before science, there was no real knowledge that was ‘discovered’?
Rationalists argue that before science there were too many conflicting beliefs for them all to be true. Now, however, we have science to allow us to discover real knowledge about the world. This view asserts that religion has no claim on truth at all. Rationalism, therefore puts science and religion into conflict.
Why has science been successful in explaining and controlling the world? (KARL POPPER)
Why has science been successful in explaining and controlling the world?
According to Sir Karl Popper (1959) science is an ‘open’ belief system where every scientist’s theories are open to scrutiny, criticism and testing by others. Science is governed by the principle of falsificationism. That is, scientists set out to try and falsify existing theories, deliberately seeking evidence that would disprove them. If the evidence from an experiment or observation contradicts a theory and shows it to be false, the theory can be discarded and the search for a better explanation can begin. In science, knowledge-claims live or die by evidence.
Why is the discarding of falsified knowledge-claims viewed as scientific ?
In Popper’s view, discarding falsified knowledge-claims is what enables scientific understanding of the world to grow. Scientific knowledge is cumulative – it builds on the achievements of previous scientists to develop a greater understanding of the world around us. As Sir Isaac Newton said on his discovery of the law of gravity ‘If I have been able to see so far, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants’ – that is, on the discoveries of his predecessors. However, despite the achievements of great scientists, no theory is ever to be taken as definitely true. For Popper, the thing about scientific knowledge is that it is not sacred or absolute truth – it can always be questioned, criticized, tested and perhaps shown to be false.
Why do some scientists disagree with science being given a special status and all other forms of knowledge being disregarded
Some scientists disagree that science should be given special status and all other forms of knowledge disregarded. The biologist Gould (1999) proposes that science and religion are two separate realms: science provides certain knowledge about the world, whereas moral guidance is the responsibility of religion. This is the relativist view, which sees science as just one of many beliefs, all of which are equally valid. Gellner (1974) disagrees, insisting that the objective nature of science sets it above all other forms of knowledge.
Explain how science appears to differs from other systems
Science appears to differs fundamentally from traditional religious belief systems.
While scientific knowledge is provisional, open to challenge and potentially disprovable, religion claims to have special, perfect knowledge of the absolute truth (sacred knowledge)
Its knowledge is literally sacred and religious organisations claim to hold it on God’s divine authority. This means that it cannot be challenged - and those who do so may be punished for heresy (blasphemy). It also means that religious knowledge does not change - how could it, if it already has the absolute truth?
Unlike scientific knowledge, therefore it is fixed and does not grow
Explain how Horton (1970) supports the argument that scientific knowledge is provisional, open to challenge and potentially disprovable compared to religion
Horton (1970) puts forwards a similar argument. He distinguishes between open and closed belief systems. Like Popper, he sees science as an open belief system, one where knowledge-claims are open to criticism and can be disproved by testing.
By contrast religion, magic and many other belief systems are closed. That is, they make knowledge-claims that cannot be successfully overturned. Whenever, its fundamental beliefs are threatened, a closed belief system has a number of ‘get-out clauses’ that reinforce the system and prevent it from being disproved - at least in the eyes of believers.
These devices vary from one belief system to another
How does POLANYI (1958) argues that belief systems have 3 devices
POLANYI (1958) argues that belief systems have 3 devices to sustain themselves in the face of apparently contradictory evidence:
- Circularity - each idea in the system is explained in terms of another idea within the system and so on, round and round.
- Subsidiary explanations - problems and inconsistencies can be explained away and a new alternative explanation may be drawn on or referred to as an other aspect
- Denial of legitimacy to rivals - belief systems reject alternative worldviews by refusing to grant any legitimacy to their basic assumptions, e.g. creationism rejects outright the evolutionists knowledge-claim that the earth is billions of years old and therefore have species that have gradually evolved over a long period rather than all having been created.
Why does Kuhn criticise Polanyi and Popper for their view on science being a closed system
Despite Popper’s view of science as open and critical, other writers argue that science itself can be seen as self-sustaining or a closed system of belief. For example, POLANYI (1958) argues that all belief systems reject fundamental challenges to their knowledge claims – science is no different.
One explanation for scientists’ refusal even to consider such challenges comes from a historian of science, KUHN (1970). He argues that a mature science such as geology, biology or physics is based on a set of shared assumptions that he calls a paradigm. The paradigm tells scientists what reality is like, what problems to study and what methods and equipment to use, what will count as evidence and even what answers they should find when they conduct research. Scientific education and training are a process of being socialised into accepting the truth of the paradigm and a successful career depends on working within it. For these reasons, any scientist who challenges the fundamental assumptions of the paradigm is likely to ridiculed and criticized and those who support it are more likely to be rewarded with bigger research grants, professorships, Nobel Prizes etc.
How have interpretivists have developed Kuhn’s ideas further?
Interpretivists have developed Kuhn’s ideas further. They argue that all knowledge – including scientific knowledge is socially constructed. That is, rather than being objective truth, it is created by social groups. In relation to science, scientific ‘facts’, those things that scientists take to be true and real – are the product of shared theories or paradigms that tell them what they should expect to see and of the particular instruments they use.
How have critical conflict sociological perspectives e.g. Marxism and Feminism viewed scientific knowledge
Other critical perspectives such as Marxism and feminism see scientific knowledge as far from pure truth. Instead, they regard it as serving the interests of dominant groups. Thus, many advances in supposedly ‘pure’ science have been driven by the need for certain types of knowledge to act as a form of ideology.
Why do postmodernists also reject the knowledge-claims of science having the ‘truth’
In a different sense, postmodernists also reject the knowledge-claims of science to have the ‘truth’. In the view of LYOTARD (1984) science is one of a number of meta-narratives or ‘big stories’ that falsely claim to possess the truth. He claims that science falsely claims to offer the truth about how the world works and believes that science is just one more ‘discourse’ or way of thinking that is used to dominate people. Like Marxists some postmodernists argue that science has become a ‘technoscience’, simply serving capitalist interests by producing commodities for profit.
What 3 main ways do sociologists define religion?
- substantive definitions
- functional definitions
- social constructionist definitions
Explain the substantive definition of religion
SUBSTANTIVE DEFINITIONS:
These focus on the content or substance of religious belief, such as a belief in God or the supernatural. For example, WEBER (1905) defines religion as a belief in a superior or supernatural power that is above nature and cannot be explained scientifically.
This reflects TYLOR (1871) who approached the definition of religion via the philosophical theory of animism: the belief that all things have a soul and a spirit. Religion is humanity’s attempt to understand the soul. He suggests the religion should be seen as a belief in ‘spiritual beings’ – the most powerful spirits are worshipped as gods and they are believed to affect people’s lives on earth and in the hereafter.
STARK and BAINBRIDGE (1985) support Tylor’s definition and agree that religion involves some conception of a supernatural being or force and the notion that the supernatural is active and that events and conditions on earth are influence by the supernatural.
Evaluation of substantive definitions of religion
Substantive definitions are exclusive – they draw a clear line between religious and non-religious beliefs. To be a religion, a set of beliefs must include belief in God or the supernatural. Substantive definitions conform to a widespread view of religion as a belief in God. However, this leaves no room for beliefs and practices that perform similar functions to religion but do not involve belief in God. Therefore, they are accused of Western bias as they exclude religion such as Buddhism, which do not have the idea of a god.
Explain the functional definition of religion
FUNCTIONAL DEFINITIONS:
Rather than defining religion in terms of specific kinds of belief, functional definitions define it in terms of the social or psychological functions it performs for individuals or society. DURKHEIM (1915) defines religion in terms of the contribution it makes to social integration, rather than any specific belief in God or the supernatural. He argues that 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’. TURNER (1991) argues that Durkheim’s definition marked the end of a concern with gods or beings and the development of an emphasis on the importance of religious practice.
Evaluate functional definitions of religion
An advantage of functional definitions is that they are inclusive – allowing us to include a wide range of beliefs and practices that perform functions such as integration. Furthermore, since they do not specify a belief in God or the supernatural, there is no bias against non-Western religions such as Buddhism. However, just because an institution or belief system integrates individuals into groups, does not make it a religion. For example, chanting at football matches might give individuals a sense of integration and solidarity, but this doesn’t mean it is a religion.
Explain the social constructionist definition of religion
SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIONIST DEFINITIONS:
Social constructionists take an interpretivist approach that focus on how members of society define religion. They argue that it is not possible to produce a single universal definition of religion, since in reality different individuals and groups mean very different things by ‘religion’. Social constructionists are interested in how definitions of religion are constructed, challenged and fought over. For example, ALDRIDGE (2007) shows how for its followers Scientology is a religion, whereas several governments have denied it legal status as a religion and sought to ban it. This shows that definitions of religion can be contested and are influenced by who has the power to define the situation.
Evaluate social constructionist definition of religion
Social constructionists do not assume that religion always involves a belief in God or the supernatural, or that it performs similar functions for everyone in societies. Their approach allows them to get close to the meanings people themselves give to religion. However, this makes it impossible to generalise about the nature of religion, since many people hold such different views about what counts as a religion.
How does Durkheim attempt to interpret religion from a functionalist perspective
THE SACRED AND THE PROFANE:
In ‘The Elementary Forms of Religious Life’ (1912) Durkheim provides the most influential attempt to interpret religion from a functionalist perspective. He begins by claiming that all societies differentiate between the scared and the profane and her argues that religion is based on this division.
Sacred: things which are considered special, significant and symbolic
Profane: things which are considered ordinary or secular
What is religion according to Durkheim?
According to Durkheim, ‘Religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices related to sacred things, that is to say, things that are set apart and forbidden’. He argues that what is regarded as sacred, provokes powerful emotions and inspires love, awe and respect and is surrounded by powerful taboos and prohibitions. Anything can be regarded as sacred by people; sacredness is not an inherent quality built into something, it is bestowed, and its significance is that it is symbolic and represents something.
However, a religion for Durkheim, is never simply a set of beliefs – it also involves rituals and/or practices in relation to the sacred and these rituals are collective. He argues that although scared symbols very from religion to religion, they all perform the essential function of uniting believers into a single moral community.
state examples of sacred things
bread is ordinary when toasted or made into a sandwich, however it is sacred when it representative of the body of Christ within Christianity and takes the form of a communion wafer.
Bible, Torah, Quran etc
provide examples of objects, animals, people that can be regarded as sacred within religious communities
Christianity - cross, dove, rosary beads, church, pilgrimages
Hinduism - Cows
Judaism - Torah, Kippah
Islam - Quran, Hajj - pilgrimage, Mosque
Explain Durkheim’s theory of Totemism
In order to understand the role of religion in society, Durkheim set out to explain the relationship between sacred things and what they represent. He hoped to understand the essence of religion by studying it in its simplest form, in a simple society.
For this reason, he used studies of the Arunta, an indigenous Australian (Aboriginal) tribe and their religion of totemism. The society was divided into clans and each clan had its own totem; a sacred symbol which was the outward visible symbol of their clan and their God. He believed that the rituals surrounding it represented the power of the group and thus served to reinforce the group’s solidarity and sense of belonging.
Therefore, the visualizing force of their society was represented as a religious symbol. From this, he argued that God and society are one – when people are worshipping God, the real object of their veneration is society – in this way, people see society as more powerful and significant than individuals. They are worshipping the moral unity of their society and therefore religious worship can be explained in terms of its social functions.
Explain the function of Collective Conscience in relation to functionalism
THE COLLECTIVE CONSCIENCE:
In Durkheim’s view, the sacred symbols represent society’s collective conscience, which is the shared norms, values, beliefs and knowledge that make social life possible – without which it would disintegrate. He argued that regular shared rituals reinforce the collective conscience and maintain social integration; they celebrate and maintain the social unity of the group which is essential to the maintenance of society.
Participating in shared rituals binds individuals together, reminding them that they are part of a single community to which they owe their loyalty. Such rituals also remind the individual of the power of society – without which they are nothing and to which they owe everything. In this sense, religion also 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 motivates us to overcome obstacles that would otherwise defeat us.
Explain the function of cognitive functions in relation to functionalism
COGNITIVE FUNCTIONS:
Durkheim sees religion, not only as a source of social solidarity, but also of our intellectual or cognitive capacities; our ability to reason and think conceptually. Religion is the origin of human thought and reason – it provides us with basic concepts such as time, space and causation. For example, with ideas about a creator bringing the world into being at the beginning of time. Furthermore, in order to share our thoughts, we need to use the same categories as others and religion provides this shared knowledge. This acceptance of shared thoughts and a moral value system underpins cohesion and stability.
Evaluate Durkheim’s views of religion
- Worsley (1956) challenges the view that there is a sharp division between the sacred and the profane and that different clans share the same totems. Even if Durkheim is correct about totemism, this does not prove that he has discovered the essence of all other religions.
- His theory may apply to small-scale societies with a single religion. It is harder to apply it to large-scale multi-faith societies, where two or more religions may be in conflict. History and contemporary society are littered with examples of conflict, terrorism, war and persecution which has a religious dimension to it. Therefore, his theory may explain social integration within religious communities, but not conflicts between them.
- Many individuals may feel excluded or alienated from their religion if they do not conform to all of its teachings, e.g., because of their sexuality. Others may feel unable to maintain the high expectations of their religion. In these cases, religion may not contribute towards individuals feeling a sense of solidarity or belonging.
- Postmodernists, such as Mestrovic (2011) argue that Durkheim’s ideas cannot be applied to contemporary society, because increasing diversity has fragmented the collective conscience, so there is no longer a shared value system to reinforce.
- Critics point out that today, religion’s cognitive functions have been undermined by other forms of knowledge and ways of intellectualising, e.g., science.
- religion can also cause conflict rather than solidarity between beliefs, territory, culture. e.g. Palestine and Israel, Shia and Sunni Muslim countries, Crusade, india and Pakistan Northern Ireland - Loyalists and Republicans, African Countries between Muslim and countries
- Religion may be a force for change e.g. Martin Luther King or Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa
- religion can alienate certain people who do not conform to their standards e.g members may feel marginalised/excluded on sexuality etc
- neglects the negative aspects of religion in terms of religions role in polarising in certain groups within society or as a source of oppression
- Functionalist perspective may be less than relevant due to secularisation and outdated
- Marxist - religion is an oppressive force that creates a false class consciousness stopping the working class from seeing inequality
- recognises how religion can be a source of community/belief for some people
Explain Bellah’s argument on how religion unifies society in relation to America (CIVIL RELIGION)
Like Durkheim and Parsons, BELLAH (1970) is interested in how religion unifies society, especially a multi-faith society like America. He argues that what unifies American society is an overarching civil religion – a belief system that attaches sacred qualities to society itself. In the American case, civil religion is a faith in Americanism or the ‘American way of life’.
What is America’s national faith according to Bellah?
BELLAH argues that civil religion integrates society in a way that individual religions cannot. While none of the many individual churches and denominations can claim loyalty of all Americans, civil religion (to a degree) can. America’s institutionalised civil religion involves loyalty to the nation-state and a belief in God, both of which are equated with being a true American. It is expressed in various rituals, symbols, beliefs, prophets and martyrs; such as the pledge of allegiance to the flag, singing the national anthem, the Lincoln Memorial and phrases such as ‘One nation under God’. However, this is not a specifically Catholic, Protestant or Jewish God, but rather an ‘American’ God.
This religion – there seems to be no other word for it – while not opposed to, and indeed sharing much in common with Christianity, is not in any specific sense Christian. Yet behind this civil religion at every point lie Biblical models: The Exodus, Chosen People, Promised Land and New Jerusalem, Death and Rebirth. But it is genuinely American and new. It sacralises the American way of life and binds together Americans from many ethnic and religious backgrounds.
Explain the symbols of Americanism in relation to Bellah
Every American knows the story of Abraham Lincoln who was born in a log cabin and dying from an assassin’s bullet in 1865. Pictured on coins and sculptured in marble in the Lincoln Memorial, he has become an almost mythical figure.
In the 19th century there was a vast migration to new lands in the West. Many migrants travelled in wagon trains, pushing back the American frontier and opening up new land to white settlement. These ‘heroic treks’ are pictured in books, paintings, postage stamps, featured in films and commemorated in statues. Sometimes the ‘virgin territory’ of the West is pictured as the ‘promised land’ and the settlers as the ‘chosen people’.
How does Malinowski reinforce Durkheim’s arguments about religion
Like Durkheim, Malinowski (1954) also believes that religion reinforces social norms and promotes social solidarity. However, unlike Durkheim he does not see religion as reflecting society as a whole or interpret religious ritual as the worship of society itself. Drawing upon his anthropological data he emphasized the psychological functions that religion plays for the individual in specific situations of emotional stress.
Identify two types of emotionally disruptive events where religion becomes functional
two types of emotionally disruptive events where religion becomes functional:
- time of life crises
- uncontrollable and uncertain events
Explain the function of religion during a time of life crises
Times of life crises: Events such as birth, puberty, marriage and especially death mark major changes and can be disruptive. Religion and religious ritual can defuse the notion of crisis at these times.
For example, the functions that can be performed by a funeral ritual can include helping people through grief/comforting someone thinking they have gone to a better place.
Funeral rituals can also be used as a proper send off ritual e.g. for closure, send off, celebration
Funerals can also help to bring the community together in their grief/mourning e.g. solidarity in grief.
Explain the function of religion in times of uncontrollable and uncertain events
Uncontrollable and uncertain events:
Unpredictable occasions are preceded by rituals to reduce anxiety. The Trobriand islanders of the Western Pacific do not engage in religious rituals before fishing in the lagoon – as it is safe, however ocean fishing is more uncertain and dangerous and is always accompanied by a ritual of ‘canoe magic’.
These rituals provided a sense of safety, closure, protection, social solidarity and is uplifting
How does Parsons combine both Durkheim’s and Malinowski’s views on religion to argue that religion is functional
Parsons (1965) combines insights from both Durkheim and Malinowski. He identifies two essential functions performed by religion in modern societies:
- It is primary source of meaning
- It creates and legitimates society’s central value system
Explain the function of religion providing a primary source of meaning in modern societies
It is the primary source of meaning:
By providing members of society with explanations of events that might otherwise appear uncontrollable, haphazard and contradictory, religion answers the ‘ultimate’ questions about the human condition and helps individuals adjust to crises and disappointments – it fosters a consensus on questions of ultimate value. For example, why good people suffer and why some die young. Such events defy our sense of justice and make life appear meaningless – this could undermine our commitment to society’s values. Religion provides answers to such questions, for example by explaining suffering as a test of faith that will be rewarded in heaven.
Explain the function of religion creating and legitimating society’s central value system
It creates and legitimates society’s central values:
Religion provides guidelines for human action and standards against which people’s conduct can be evaluated. He claims that many norms in society are an expression and reflection of religious beliefs. Furthermore, in America, Protestantism has sacralised the core American values of individualism, meritocracy and self-discipline. This serves to promote value consensus and social stability.
Generalised norms that reflect religious beliefs -
e.g. treats others as you like to be treated - respecting people, do not kill, eye for an eye - death penalty/bearing arms, being obedient to your parents, charitable/sense of community, family - spending time holidays
Explain how Karl Marx viewed religion?
For Marx, religion is an illusion. It originated amongst primitive people in response to their fear of the unknown. He believed that it would have disappeared as people gained a more rational understanding of the world, however rather than this happening, the rise of industrial capitalism led to religion being taken over by the bourgeoisie and incorporated into ruling class ideology. Religion was used like all dominant ideology in the superstructure - to distort people’s perception of reality and in doing so, justify the status quo and prop up capitalism. Therefore, religion is understood as being a conservative force.
What does Marx say about religion (Quote)
According to Marx, ‘Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the sentiment of a heartless world and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people’.
How does religion acts as an social opiate according to Marx?
Marx believes that religion acts as a social opiate to dull the pain produced by capitalist oppression and alienation, a source of solace and compensation for the misery of their alienation. However, it does not do anything to solve the problem. Similarly, Lenin (1870-1924) describes religion as a ‘spiritual gin’ - an intoxicant doled out to the masses by the ruling class to confuse them and keep them in their place. Therefore, religion is a misguided attempt to make life more bearable, a form of self-delusion. It obscures reality and offers temporary comforts for the oppression caused by capitalism.
How does the religion dull the pain of oppression in a number of ways
For Marx, religion can dull the pain of oppression in a number of ways:
- It promises a paradise of eternal bliss in life after death
- It can make virtue out of the suffering produced by oppression
- Religion can offer hope of supernatural intervention to solve problems on earth:
- It is often used to justify the social order and a person’s position within it:
Explain how religion can dull the pain of oppression through promising a paradise of eternal bliss in life after death
It promises a paradise of eternal bliss in life after death: Engels argues that Christianity, Judaism and Islam all provide a vision of heaven that makes life on earth more bearable - this is because it encourages people to anticipate something better – a fantasy escape of heavenly rewards. If people are hoping for something better in the afterlife, they are more likely to conform in society.
Explain how religion can dull the pain of oppression through making a virtue out of suffering produced by oppression
It can make a virtue out of the suffering produced by oppression:
Religion promises redress for injustice, a reward for suffering. This is illustrated in the biblical quotation: ‘It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.’ Those who are oppressed, poor and disadvantaged are offered hope and are therefore likely to put up with their conditions on earth.
Explain how religion can dull the pain of oppression through religion offering hope of supernatural intervention to solve problems on earth
Religion can offer hope of supernatural intervention to solve problems on earth:
Followers are offered hope that through prayer their God will intervene and answer their prayers - this anticipation of something better makes life on earth more acceptable. It discourages individuals from rebelling against the system and attempting through individual authorship to change their position in society. Thus, religion prevents social change and maintains the status quo.
Explain how religion can dull the pain of oppression through religion justifying the social order and persons position in it
It is often used to justify the social order and a person’s position within it:
Followers are told that God created and ordained the social structure - this lends sacred support for the status quo. This belief obscures and disguises human authorship and responsibility for inequality. Attempts to change the social order are therefore viewed as blasphemous – a rejection of God’s plan, and therefore punishable by eternal damnation.
To Marxists, what other function does religion perform besides cushioning the effects of capitalism?
For Marx, religion does not simply cushion the effects of capitalism – it is an instrument of that oppression and maintains ruling class power. It acts as a mechanism of social control and reinforces a system of unequal relations – in this way it inhibits social change and is therefore a conservative force. In offering the illusion of hope in a hopeless situation, religion produces a false consciousness and a philosophical acceptance of the status quo. He saw religion as a way of mystifying subordinate classes, using a smokescreen of ritual, language, ideas and religious paraphernalia etc. to give religion a special place in people’s minds.
State examples of religions that reinforce the Marxist perspective on religion
a) The Church of England retains some political, social and economic influence. It may not be the Tory Party at prayer as it once was, but it still takes a conservative stance on some issues.
(b) The Catholic Church continues to exercise great influence over its members, particularly in Third World countries, often acting as a barrier to social change, justifying social inequalities and upholding right-wing regimes.
(c) In the US, fundamentalist Christianity has been closely identified with conservative political groups – being closed allied to the Republican party – exerting influence over political decision making and the selection of candidates for political office.
(d) In Eastern Europe, the Christian churches provided some of the impetus for the overthrow of communist political systems in the 1980s and 90s, which some Marxists would see as clear evidence of religion acting against the interests of the proletariat.
(e) Where religion has been involved in reform movements as in South Africa and in the Civil Rights movement in the US, this can be seen as limiting the degree of achievable change by channelling it into reform rather than revolution. Religion might appear to be involved in these social movements, but in reality they hold the oppressed back from their full potential
(f) In other cases, religion can be seen to be, not just preventing or limiting social progress, but actively ‘turning the social clock back’. The fundamentalist beliefs of movements like the Taliban in Afghanistan have reduced the social status of women, removed all external influences and instituted a religious state.
All of these examples and more seem to suggest that in contemporary society, religion continues to function in the way Marx suggested: preventing, limiting or retarding social progress
Evaluate the Marxist perspective on religion
- Marx argues that religion may be a tool of oppression that masks exploitation and creates false consciousness. However, critics argue that he ignores the positive functions of religion, such as psychological comfort and adjustment to misfortune. However, Marxists would argue that this is exactly what Marx recognised. . Neo-Marxists see some religions as assisting not hindering and inhibiting class consciousness and social change.
- Religion does not necessarily function effectively as an ideology to control the population. Abercrombie, Hill and Turner (2015) argue that in pre-capitalist society, while Christianity was a major element of ruling class ideology, it had only limited impact on the peasantry. . Religion continues to have a role in some communist societies and therefore, it must have functions that are independent of propping up capitalism.
- Today, the trend of secularisation undermines the validity and relevance of Marx’s views of religion. It is debatable whether religion has the power and influence to function as Marxists claim it does.
- Functionalists would argue that Marxists ignore the negative functions of religion
- ignores how religion can be a force of social change within society as Neo-Marxists would heavily emphasise liberation theology
- not everyone accepts the position they are in
State limitations of the Marxist theory of religion
Marx stated that ‘religion is only the illusory sun which revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself.’ In a truly socialist or communist society, individuals, according to Marx, revolve around themselves and are not alienated or suffering from a false consciousness. Religion, along with other illusions and distortions of reality disappear. However, there are a number of examples that undermine the Marxist argument and by implication illustrate that there is more to religion than a set of beliefs and practices that develop in capitalist societies to prop them up.
After the communist revolution in 1917 Soviet law restricted religious worship to designated churches and the religious instruction of children was banned. HOSKING (1988) points out that before the revolution there were more than 50,000 Russian orthodox churches but by 1939 only approximately 4,000 remained. However, LANE (1970) argues that these figures do not necessarily support the idea that religion declined. Much research suggests that religion remained important to large proportions of the population during the communist era. Reflecting this, when Gorbachov was in power, he implemented a policy of glasnost (openness) and restrictions on religion were relaxed.
Furthermore, communism still flourishes in Cuba, yet even the staunch communist Fidel Castro was forced to acknowledge the continuing appeal of religion when he invited Pope John Paul to Cuba in January 1988. The Pope addressed large enthusiastic crowds, suggesting that Roman Catholicism remained strong despite some 40 years in which the communist state had discouraged religious belief and practice
There is also evidence which suggests that religion does not always:
- Legitimize power
- Justify privilege
- Inhibit social change
What type of character does religion have?
Neo-Marxists see religion as having a dual character; traditionally it has promoted stability, maintained the status quo and inhibited social change, however they also recognize that it has the potential to be a force for change and inspire protest and rebellion.
Explain Gramsci’s views on Neo-Marxist theory
GRAMSCI (1971):
Gramsci was well aware of the control over consciousness (hegemony) which the Catholic Church had traditionally exercised over its members. He was also critical of what he regarded as the church’s characteristic subservience to the state and ruling class interests. However, he did not assume that religion must inevitably play such a role. He claimed that during different historical periods, religions had emerged which expressed and supported the interests of oppressed classes. He argued that religious beliefs could be popularized by proletarian intellectuals.
define proletarian intellectuals
Proletarian intellectuals refer to intellectuals that are part of the oppressed group and can encourage members to use religion to promote change rather than to support oppression e.g, Martin Luther King - civil rights movement, Archbishop desmond tutu - South Africa Apartheid
Explain Maduro’s argument that religion is not a conservative force but a revolutionary force
MADURO (1982):
Whilst accepting many aspects of Marx’s analysis, Maduro rejects the notion that religion is always a conservative force, arguing that it has the potential to be revolutionary. He accepts that in societies where religion remains a dominant and conservative institution, social liberation can only be achieved if significant changes occur within the churches. Looking at Latin America, he accepts that the Catholic Church had been an extremely conservative institution for centuries: encouraging a fatalistic acceptance of poverty and tended to support the bourgeoisie and right-wing military dictatorships which represented its interests (largely by denying the existence of social conflicts between oppressive and oppressed classes).
According to Maduro, what happened in the 1960s in relation to the Catholic Church in Latin America
In the 1960s a movement emerged within the Catholic Church in Latin America with a strong commitment to the poor and opposition to military dictatorships – Liberation theology. It represented a major change in direction for the Catholic Church. Catholic priests increasingly demonstrated their autonomy from the bourgeoisie by criticizing them and voicing the anguish and aspirations of the oppressed helping them to establish support groups called ‘base communities’ and helping workers and peasants to fight oppression under the protection of the church. Priests took the lead in developing literacy programmes, educating the poor about their situation, raising awareness and mobilizing support. They were often the only authority figures who took the side of the oppressed when dictatorships used murder squads and torture to hold power.
define liberation theology
Liberation theology refers to a religious/political movement that is heavily committed to supporting the poor and voicing the anguish of the oppressed in order to liberate. These movements usually have organic intellectuals of the community leading.
Why does Maduro argue that theological differences within any church can lead to liberation theology?
Maduro states that theological disagreements within any church can provide new interpretations of a religion which are critical of the rich and powerful. Importantly, by expressing the discontentment of the oppressed, by raising and shaping their consciousness and by working with them to devise strategies of action, he claims that the clergy can fulfil the functions of Gramsci’s proletarian intellectuals.
However, since then the movement has lost influence and during the 1980s the Church’s official attitude changed and once more it became more conservative. Pope John Paul II condemned liberation theology on the grounds that it resembled Marxism and instructed priests to concentrate on pastoral activities, not political struggle. Nevertheless, its success (resisting state terror and helping to bring about democratically elected governments in most Latin American countries) led Neo-Marxists to question the view that religion is always a conservative force.
Explain how turner argues about religion in relation to the material base
TURNER (1983):
Turner agrees with Marx that religion rises from the material base. However, unlike Marx he does not believe that religion is always an important part of ruling class ideology. Drawing on historical evidence, he claims that in feudal times the peasantry was largely indifferent to religion. By comparison, religion played an important part in the lives of the ruling class, the feudal lords.
Summarise liberation theology
Liberation theology is a religious justification for the liberation of oppressed peoples. It is developed in Latin America in the 1950s and 60s as an alternative to the standard view of the First World’s duties towards the Third World. It is criticised that the first world could end the poverty of the Third by transferring economic resources from one to the other. The theology of liberation said that, far from being the passive objects of aid, it was essential that the poor themselves should be the principal agents of their own disimpoverishment.
This meant understanding their own condition and the reason for it and responding accordingly. In liberation theology’s purest form, sort the Vatican are most woried about those conditions and the reasons for them are analysed in Marxist terms and so is the remedy. What the theology of liberation has to say is that the only escape from poverty which does justice to human dignity is that engineered and struggled for by the poor themselves
What did Father Camilo Torres state about revolution?
“Revolution is necessary to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked and procure a life of wellbeing for the needy majority of our people. I believe that the revolutionary struggle is appropriate for the needy majority of our people. I believe that revolutionary struggle is appropriate for the Christian and the priests. Only by Revolution by changing the concrete conditions of our country, can we enable men to practice love for each other.”
The catholic church did not support Torres. Believing that the government would crush peaceful protest, he joined a guerrilla movement. Torres was killed fighting government forces in 1966. The peasants saw him as martyr and in 1968 many priests followed his example and pledged their support for revolutionary struggle against the state.
What does the feminist perspective view religion as a instrument for?
Feminists, like Marxists also argue that religion can be an instrument of domination and oppression. However, they see religion as a product of patriarchy rather than capitalism – serving the interests of men not capitalists. Importantly, this view of religion as patriarchal, is not just confined to feminists. For example, according to GIDDENS (1997) ‘The Christian religion is a resolutely male affair in its symbolism as well as its hierarchy. While Mary, the mother of Jesus may sometimes be treated as if she had divine qualities, God is the father, a male figure and Jesus took the human shape of a man. Woman is portrayed as created from a rib taken from man.’
The gendered implications of male symbolism and religious hierarchy in religion largely reinforces patriarchal ideas on gender as men are viewed as superior whereas women are viewed inferior who are meant to be subservient.
Is the secondary and subordinate role of women in Christian doctrine found in other religions, according to feminists?
Feminists argue that the secondary and subordinate role of women in Christian doctrine is also typical of most other religions. ARMSTRONG (1993) argues that no major religions have been particularly good to women, they have usually become male affairs and women have been relegated to a marginal position. She claims that although women have made significant gains in many areas, patriarchal attitudes have meant that women have continued to be excluded from key roles in most of the world’s major religions.
How does holm draw similar to conclusions to Armstrong’s arguments?
HOLM (1994) draws similar conclusions to ARMSTRONG arguing that major religions typically subordinate women to marginal positions or totally exclude them. She recognizes that women do play a role in many major religions, but claims they play a subservient one and one that is rarely played out in the public domain. She provides a number of examples to support her claims:
Orthodox Judaism: only males are allowed to take a full part in ceremonies, synagogues are segregated by gender.
Buddhism: men are able to practice as monks and women as nuns, however monks are seen as superior to nuns.
Hinduism: only men can become Brahmanic priests
Islam: men make all the religious and legal rulings. Women in some regions are not allowed to enter mosques for worship.
Sikhism: perhaps the most egalitarian of all the major religions since all offices are equally open to males and females. However, in reality only a small minority of women hold significant positions.
Chinese popular religion: women are associated with Yin and men with Yang. Yang spirits are more important and powerful.
Japanese folk religions: women are responsible for organizing public rituals but only men can participate in public performances.
How are women’s second-status in religion linked to their sexuality?
According to HOLM women’s second-class status in religion is often related to their sexuality. She claims that women’s bodies and their sexuality are felt to be dangerous by many religions. Because they menstruate and give birth, they are considered to have a greater capacity to ‘pollute’ religious rituals. She observes that in many religious traditions women are forbidden to enter sacred places or touch sacred objects during their menstrual period. For example, Hindu women are prohibited from approaching family shrines when pregnant or menstruating and Muslim women are not allowed to touch the Koran, go into a mosque or pray when menstruating.
How are the teachings of religions patriarchal?
Furthermore, the teachings of many religions are considered to be inherently patriarchal. In relation to the bible men are understood as made ‘in the image and glory of God’ and women made ‘for the glory of man.’ This is illustrated in a passage from the New Testament: ‘Wives be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church.’
Furthermore, there are many female characters in biblical texts, but the prime parts are reserved for males – there is no female equivalent of Moses or the disciples. The most prominent females, Mary and Eve both serve and reinforce patriarchal ideas regarding the virtues of motherhood and the dangers of female sexuality (virgin/whore dichotomy). As in life, females in religion are defined by their sexuality rather than their actions.
Explain Simone Be Beauvoir’s view on religion (feminist perspective)
De Beauvoir saw religion functioning in a very similar way to Marx but saw it as particularly oppressive to women. In ‘The Second Sex’, she argued that religion can be used by the oppressors to control the oppressed. She points out that men have generally exercised control over religious beliefs and argues that ‘man enjoys the great advantage of having a God endorse the code he writes’.
She claims that the code uses divine authority to support male dominance, ‘for the Jews, Mohammedans and Christians, among others, man is master by divine right; the fear of God will therefore repress any impulse towards revolt in the downtrodden female’. However, she concedes that in modern societies, ‘religion seems much less an instrument of constraint than an instrument of deception’.
Like Marx, De Beauvoir argues that religion gives women the false belief that they will be compensated for their sufferings on earth by egalitarianism in heaven. In these ways, the subjugation of women through religion helps to maintain the status quo – in which women are unequal. She also notes the irony that women are vital to religion, because it is they who do much of the work for religious organisations and introduce children to religious beliefs.
Explain Nawal El Saadawi views on religion (feminist perspective)
NAWAL El SAADAWI (1980):
El Saadawi is a Muslim feminist writer and a leading advocate of women’s rights in the Arab world. She was sacked from her post as Egypt’s Director of Public Health by the then ruler Sadat and has been imprisoned for her political activities. In ‘The Hidden Face of Eve’, she discusses female oppression in the Arab world and elsewhere and considers the importance of religion in creating and perpetuating oppression. Drawing on her own experiences, she recounts when her parents, without warning or explanation, forced her as a child to undergo female genital mutilation. She also explains sexual aggression, prostitution, slavery and abortion in terms of patriarchal dominance of Arab men over women.
According to El Saadawi, oppressive practices are often attributed to the influence of Islam. However, she rejects this line of argument, stating that they are not directly caused by religion in general or Islam in particular, but to the dominant patriarchal ideology which allows men to distort religion to serve their own interests by justifying and legitimizing the oppression of women. She argues that religion started to become patriarchal through the misinterpretation of religious beliefs by men and this has enabled men to use religion as an abuse of power. She claims that this applies to Greek mythology, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, amongst others.
According to El Saadawi, ‘the great religions of the world uphold similar principles in so far as the submission of women to men is concerned. They also agree in the attribution of masculine characteristics to their God. Islam and Christianity have both contributed to the evolution of humanity, nevertheless where the cause of women is concerned, they added a new load to their already heavy chains. She adds that women can only improve their lot by struggling for their own liberation and claims that Arab women have been doing this for longer than their Western counterparts.
Explain Helen Watson’s views on religion (feminist perspective)
HELEN WATSON (1994):
Taking a different perspective, Watson points out that apparently oppressive practices associated with certain religions can often be open to varied interpretations. The example that she draws upon is that of the veiling of Islamic women. She argues that for non-Muslim writers, the veil is variously depicted as a tangible symbol of women’s oppression, a constraining and restricting form of dress and a form of social control religiously sanctioning women’s invisibility and subordinate socio-political status. However, she states that this is rarely the viewpoint taken by Muslim women. To many, the hijab has advantages for women that can reduce or allow them to cope with male oppression. She claims that rather than being a submission to patriarchy, it is in fact a means of gender and religious assertiveness.
Evaluate the feminist perspective on religion from a historical perspective
A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE:
Many feminists argue that there will never be gender equality in the major religions, so, long as notions of gender are attached to an understanding of God. However, DALY (1978) states that historically women have not always been subordinate or invisible in religion – until 4000 years ago the opposite appeared to be so. In the days when people worshipped gods of nature, the female sex, because of being seen as closer to nature were regarded with respect.
ARMSTRONG (1993) argues that women were considered as central to the spiritual quest and there were very few effigies of God as man. However male dominated cultures of the Northern hemisphere and the Middle East needed a patriarchal rationale in order to justify their behaviour – it is in this context that male gods became increasingly important. Reflecting this, many feminists argue that the dominance of Monotheism over Polytheism represented the death knell for females – this originated with Yahweh, the god of Abraham. This God of Israel would later become the God of Christians and Muslims alike - the same male god.
Evaluate the feminist perspective in relation to resistance to oppression
Most feminists have tended to portray women as the passive victims of religious oppression and the religions themselves as the instruments of such oppression. Increasingly however, some feminists have come to acknowledge that women can no longer be seen as so passive and that it should not be assumed that all religions are equally oppressive to women. For example, in Catholicism becoming a nun can be interpreted as either highly oppressive or incredibly liberating. HOLM and BOWKER (1994) go so far as to suggest that religious organisations developed exclusively for women are the forerunners of the modern women’s movement, in that they separate women from men and by implication, enhance women’s sense of identity.
Although women ministers have long been accepted in some sects and denominations, the Catholic and Anglican churches persisted in formally supporting gender inequalities. However, in 1992 the Church of England voted to make the priesthood open to women and in 2015 voted to allow women to become bishops. Now over a fifth of its priests are female. Nevertheless, many groups opposed this decision, including the organization, Women Against the Ordination of Women arguing that ordaining women is a blasphemous deviation from the biblical truth.
How has the patriarchal structure of organised religion been challenged?
However, there have been challenges to the patriarchal structure of organized religion. Judaism has allowed women to become rabbis since 1972 and liberal Protestant organisations such as Quakerism has never been oppressive to women. KAUR-SINGH (1994) observed that Sikh gurus pleaded the cause for the emancipation of Indian womanhood, fully supporting them in improving their status. GROSS (1994) identified signs of a post-patriarchal Buddhism developing in the West which does not differentiate roles for male and female members.
In addition, BADAWI (1994) has noted aspects of Islam that are positive for women, such as being able to keep their own family name when they marry. Furthermore, while western feminists tend to see the hijab or veil worn by many Muslim women as a symbol of oppression, to the wearer it may be a means of liberation. According to GILLIAT-RAY (2010), some young British Muslim women choose to wear the hijab in order to gain parental approval to enter further education and 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 family.
BRUSCO (2012) found in Colombia, belonging to a Pentecostal group can be empowering for some women. Despite the strong belief in traditional gender roles that such groups hold, women are able to use religion to increase their power and influence by encouraging men to respect them
Explain the Weberian perspective on the role of religion
One of the most famous examples showing that religion can be a force for change comes from WEBER in his work ‘The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism’ (1904). He conducted a detailed analysis of the world’s major religions and in doing so, examined the relationship between Protestantism and the development of Western industrial capitalism.
His main argument was that a particular form of Protestantism called Calvinism (which emerged in the (17th) preceded the development of capitalism which initially emerged in areas where this religion was influential. Many of the early entrepreneurs who helped initiate economic development through the industrial revolution and capitalism were Calvinists.
Modern capitalism is based on the systematic, efficient, rational pursuit of profit for its own sake, rather than for consumption. WEBER called this, the spirit of capitalism. According to WEBER, this spirit had what he calls an elective affinity or unconscious similarity to the Calvinists’ beliefs and attitudes. Therefore, after establishing a correlation between Calvinism and capitalism. Weber analysed what features and characteristics it embodied which could have implications for economic change and development.
Explain Calvinist beliefs
CALVINIST BELIEFS:
Predestination: WEBER found that Calvinists (just like believers of other salvation religions) longed for a better life in the hereafter. The most significant teaching of John Calvin (1509-64) was that of the theodicy of predestination: the notion that their fate on earth and the hereafter was already known by God. They believed that God predetermined everything, including whether one goes to heaven or hell and figured that the best way to discover if they were among the elect was to obtain the assurance that came from righteous living.
Divine transcendence: God was far above and beyond this world and no human being could possibly claim to know God’s will. This led Calvinists to feel an ‘unprecedented inner loneliness’, which when combined with the doctrine of predestination, created a salvation anxiety in the Calvinists.
Asceticism: This refers to abstinence, self-discipline and self-denial – abstaining from life’s pleasures, avoiding self-indulgence and living an austere lifestyle.
The idea of a vocation/calling: Before Calvinism, the idea of a religious vocation (a calling to God) meant renouncing everyday life to join a convent or monastery. WEBER calls this, other-worldly asceticism. By contrast, Calvinism introduced for the first time the idea of this-worldly asceticism. The only thing they knew of God’s plan for humanity came from the Bible, which revealed to them that we were put on this earth to glorify God’s name by our work. Therefore, the idea of a calling or vocation meant constant, methodical work, but in an occupation, not a monastery. Work was viewed as a religious duty – the Protestant ethic.
Explain the Calvinist belief of predestination
Predestination: WEBER found that Calvinists (just like believers of other salvation religions) longed for a better life in the hereafter. The most significant teaching of John Calvin (1509-64) was that of the theodicy of predestination: the notion that their fate on earth and the hereafter was already known by God. They believed that God predetermined everything, including whether one goes to heaven or hell and figured that the best way to discover if they were among the elect was to obtain the assurance that came from righteous living.
Explain the Calvinist belief of divine transcendence
Divine transcendence: God was far above and beyond this world and no human being could possibly claim to know God’s will. This led Calvinists to feel an ‘unprecedented inner loneliness’, which when combined with the doctrine of predestination, created a salvation anxiety in the Calvinists.
Explain the Calvinist belief of asceticism
Asceticism: This refers to abstinence, self-discipline and self-denial – abstaining from life’s pleasures, avoiding self-indulgence and living an austere lifestyle
Explain the Calvinist belief of idea of a vocation/calling
The idea of a vocation/calling: Before Calvinism, the idea of a religious vocation (a calling to God) meant renouncing everyday life to join a convent or monastery. WEBER calls this, other-worldly asceticism. By contrast, Calvinism introduced for the first time the idea of this-worldly asceticism. The only thing they knew of God’s plan for humanity came from the Bible, which revealed to them that we were put on this earth to glorify God’s name by our work. Therefore, the idea of a calling or vocation meant constant, methodical work, but in an occupation, not a monastery. Work was viewed as a religious duty – the Protestant ethic.
How does the wealth and success gained by Calvinists perform a psychological function?
The wealth and success gained by Calvinists performed a psychological function, in that it allowed them to cope with their salvation anxiety – they interpreted their wealth as a sign of God’s favour and their salvation (even though this was contrary to their belief that God’s will was unknowable). Furthermore, even though they prospered in material terms, Calvinists adopted a very negative attitude towards worldly pleasures and were driven by the pursuit of profit and renewed profit
How do Calvinists beliefs align with the spirit of capitalism
Furthermore, even though they prospered in material terms, Calvinists adopted a very negative attitude towards worldly pleasures and were driven by the pursuit of profit and renewed profit. This importance placed on wealth creation and the restrictions on spending were central to early businesses that expanded to create capitalist societies – the spirit of capitalism. Because of this, WEBER claimed that there was an elective affinity between the Protestant outlook and capitalist behaviour, such that the first gave rise to the latter – Calvinism produced exactly the kind of mind frame which encouraged capitalist habits.
Why does weber argue that religious meaning and purpose directs action
WEBER believed that religious meaning and purpose can direct action and maintained that his work demonstrated that religious beliefs could impact on economic phenomena. Because of this he concluded that religion could essentially be a dynamic force. Unlike functionalists and Marxists who regarded religion as a conservative force, promoting social integration and impeding change, he regarded it as a potential catalyst creating the energy that lies behind pivotal economic and social change.
It is important to recognise that WEBER was not arguing that Calvinist beliefs alone were the cause of modern capitalism – these beliefs were not sufficient to bring capitalism into being – (other material and economic factors were necessary such as natural resources, trade, a money economy, towns and cities, a system of law etc.) - but they were central to its development. However, he notes that ancient China and India were materially more advanced than Europe, but capitalism did not take off there and he attributes this to the lack of a religious belief, such as Calvinism, that would have spurred economic development.
How does Calvinist beliefs differ to other religions?
In ancient India, Hinduism was an ascetic religion like Calvinism, favouring renunciation of the material world. However, its orientation was other-worldly: it directed its followers’ concerns away from the material world towards the spiritual world. In ancient China, Confucianism also discouraged the growth of rational capitalism, but for different reasons. Like Calvinism, Confucianism was a this-worldly religion that directed its followers towards the material world, but unlike Calvinism, it was not ascetic. Therefore, both Hinduism and Confucianism lacked the drive to systematically accumulate wealth that is necessary for modern capitalism. WEBER argued that Calvinism was unique in combining asceticism with a this-worldly orientation to enable the spirit of capitalism to emerge.
