Assess the usefulness of functionalist theories in understanding religion today Essay

Functionalists ask put forward their perspective on piety and how it benefits both familiarity and the individual starting with how organized morality brings people together harmoniously, creating social coherence and a sense of belonging as people believe in the same thing and all abide by the same rules. devotion creates and maintains a value consensus whilst bighearted hostelry social order. By conforming to religious vox populis this allows us to gain morals and so Functionalists see piety as a positive aspect to hunting lodge.Durkheim defines trust as a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things. He says all societies distri neverthelesse the world into the sacred and the profane. Sacred argon things set apart and forbidden, shake up feelings of awe, fear and wonder. Profane are ordinary things that have no significance. His mass on sacred symbols represents societys collective consciousness which is the shared out norms, value beliefs an d knowledge that make social spirit possible without such(prenominal) consciousness it would crumble. Participating in shared rituals binds individuals together reminding them that they are a part of a community. Religion defines values as sacred giving the people great power compared to non-believers. Through collective worship society understands the moral bonds that unite them. Durkheim argues that religious belief functions to reinforce the collective unity or social solidarity of a group.The individual sees religion performing a meaning(a) function allowing them to feel a part of society and strengthens us to await lifes trials and motivates us to overcome obstacles that would otherwise overpower us. Durkheim utilise the religion of Aborigines to develop his argument. He calls their religion totemism, as each folk of aborigines had a sacred symbol called a totem which was a symbol of their gods and of their society which reinforces their sense of belonging. Therefore, he argues the people are really worshipping society. Like Durkheim Malinowski sees religion as reinforcing social norms and promoting social solidarity. In his view it serves psychological functions for individuals portion them cope with emotional stress that would undermine social solidarity.He argues that end is the main reason for religious beliefs and identifies two types of situations where the outcome is important but uncontrollable and thus uncertain and at times of life crises events such as birth, death etc. religion helps to minimise disruption. Bellah said courtly religions integrates society in ways that individual cant as its able to unite a nation.For font in ground forces American civil religion involves loyalty to the nation state and belief in God. It is expressed in many ways such as the national anthem and allegiance to the flag. Parsons says that religion helps people to deal with things that are unforeseen and have outcomes that can non be changed. There are essential functions of religion in society it creates and legitimates societys values. It achieves this by sacralising core values such as individualism, meritocracy and self-discipline which promotes value consensus.Religion also provides a primary source of meaning answering ultimate questions about life which helps people to adjust to adverse events and maintain stability. However, Durkheims analysis has been criticised as he only looked at small pre-industrial societies so his views do non apply to complex modern societies. Also he fails to account for the training of new religions some of which reject the norms and values current at the time, for example the Amish. His analysis was based on flawed evidence as he misunderstood both Totemism and the behaviour of the Aborigines. As a result of Durkheims research it could be argued that the Functionalist views of religion are not useful.This is because thither may be cultural differences which prevent him from understanding the behaviours displayed in non-western society. Therefore it could run low to results that may be misrepresentative of all viewpoints on religion. His data may not be applicable to todays society because of the diverse constitution of different cultures. Some critics may argue that the Functionalist perspective is outdated and in that locationfore not representative of modern society. They suggest that society needs religion to function and keep social order thus without it society would fall in down. Although secularisation of religion appears to be occurring society is still functioning.It could also be argued that religion can create conflict and division amongst society, for example there have been several world conflicts due to religious beliefs which highlights that religion does not create social solidarity as the functionalists suggest. Marxists however criticise the functionalist view as they argue religion is a unifying source that strengthens the value consensus and is a take in of all society. They see religion as a feature only of class-divided society. In such a society, there is always the effectiveness for class conflict, and Marx predicted that the working class would ultimately become conscious of their victimization and unite to overthrow capitalism.This would then mean society being egalitarian in which there would no longer be exploitation, and Marxists see religion as a feature only of a class-divided society. As such, there will be no need for religion in democratic society and it will eventually disappear entirely. In the Marxist view, religion operates as an ideological weapon. Religion misleads the poor into believing that their suffering is clean and that they will be favoured in the afterlife. Such ideas therefore create a false consciousness. Marx however ignored the positive functions of religion such as psychological adjustment to misfortune. Neo-Marxists see certain forms of religion as assisting not hindering the developm ent of class consciousness.