Emile Durkheim: Religion and society.

Relevance: Sociology Paper I:  Sociological Thinkers: Emile Durkheim- Division of labour, social fact, suicide, religion and society. 

INTRODUCTION

Durkheim’s major book “The elementary forms of Religious life” (1912) has been regarded as one of the most profound and most original work upon Religion. It is regarded as his best and most mature work. Where suicide focused on a large amount of statistics from varying sources, the elementary forms of Religious life used one case study in depth, the Australian aborigines.

Durkheim choose this group because he felt they represented the most basic, elementary forms of religion within a culture. Durkheim set out to do two things, established the fact that religion was not divinely or super naturally inspired and was in fact a product of society. Durkheim also sought to identify the common things that religion placed an emphasis upon, as well as what effects those religious beliefs had on the lives of all within a society.

ANALYSIS

According to Durkheim, religion is something eminently social. Religious representations are collective representations which express collective reality. Recognizing the social origin of religion, Durkheim argued that religion acted as a source of solidarity. Religion provides a meaning for life. Durkheim saw it as a critical part of the social system. Religion provides social control, cohesion and purpose for people as well as another means of communication and gathering for individuals to interact and reaffirm social norms.

Durkheim’s concern about religion lay in the fact that it was one of the main agencies of solidarity and morality in society and was therefore parts of the central problem of social solidarity which he wished to explore. Emile Durkheim has many purposes for studying elementary forms of Religion.

Firstly:

Durkheim wanted to clear all its obsession by writing a book on religion before his death. His duty was to know the problem of the society.

Secondly:

Durkheim was influenced by two scholars.

1. W. Roberton Smith, in his book “The religion of semites” (1894) concluded that ancient religions consisted primarily of institutions and practices that is of rites and ceremonies and that myths that is beliefs and creeds, were an outgrowth of these. In fact his ideas later contributed to the formation of sociological theory of religion.
2. James Frazar, who is famous for his book “Golden Bough”

They have not talked about the origin of religion and not suggested to how modern religion functions in the society. Durkheim developed the idea that study of religion in its most complex form can be understood, accomplished only when religion is studied in its most primitive and elementary forms.

Thirdly:

The confusion of the relationship between religion and science. According to Durkheim, Science itself reveals that religion is merely the transfiguration of society. Emile Durkheim has studied the Arunta tribes of Australian aborigines. To define religion, he says, we must first free the mind of all preconceived ideas of religion. He discards the notion that religion is concerned with the mysterious or supernatural phenomena, with gods, spirits and ghosts. He also points out that religion is as concerned with the ordinary as the extra-ordinary aspects of life.

Definition of the Phenomenon, Religion:

According to Durkheim, Religion refers to:

“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 in one simple moral community called church, all those who adhere to it.”

The definition of religion at which Durkheim arrives is:

“Religion is an interdependent system of beliefs and practices regarding things which are sacred, that is to say, apart forbidden, beliefs and practices which unite all those who follow them in a single moral community called a church.” The concept of church is added to the concept of the sacred and to the system of beliefs in order to differentiate religion from magic, which does not necessarily involve the consensus of the faithful in one church.

Refutation of the previous explanations regarding religion:

There were two interpretations contrary to Durkheim regarding religion. These two interpretations which he seeks to refute in the first part of the Book.

They are:

In animism religious beliefs are held to be beliefs in spirits, these spirits being the transfiguration of the experience of men have of their two fold nature of body and soul. As for naturism it amounts to stating that men worship transfigured natural forces.

Animism:

The theory of animism is the work of E.B. Tylor and may be found in his “Primitive culture” first published in 1871. According to Tylor, animism is essentially a belief in the spirit of the dead. Tylor argued that early men had a need to explain dreams, shadows, hallucinations, sleep and death.

Tylor considered the belief in spirit or invisible soul or ‘self as almost an inevitable result of a universal phenomenon such as dreams. Very commonly the view is held that spirit visits a man in sleep, that too when he is experiencing dreams. Tylor asserted that the primitive man could hardly explain a dream in which he had certain actual experiences.

For example he dreamt of a hunting adventure which resulted in his taking home the hunted animal and enjoying fine dinner. After waking up from the sleep, he found in reality that he had not left his cave. How could he explain this? The primitive man hence believed in a spiritual self which was separable from his bodily self and which could lead as independent existence.

When once he got this idea he gradually started extending the same to regard other animate beings and inanimate objects, as possessing a spirit. In this way the primitive man was led to animism. Tylor is of the opinion that animism lies at the very basis of all religions.

In his “principles of sociology” Herbert Spencer has stated that religion originated mainly in Ghost-Fear. The ancestral ghosts which were endowed with super human powers, were believed to manipulate human affairs and natural forces.

Hence primitive men had to keep the ancestral ghosts in good humour if they were to act in his behalf. Spencer said that the deceased tribal leaders of great power came to be eventually worshipped as gods. The belief in Gods originated in this way. Most of the anthropologists believe that the concept of animism is fundamental to all religion.

Naturism:

It amounts to state that men worship transfigured natural forces. Naturism simply suggests that this is the type of religion which has emerged out of people’s abstract forces of the nature. Believing worship of the nature as supernatural or transcendental is called Naturism.

Durkheim rejected both concepts:

1. Because he felt that they failed to explain the universal key distinction between the sacred and the profane;
2. Because they tended to explain religion away by interpreting it as an illusion. That is the reductionistic fallacy. Moreover to love spirits whose unreality one affirms or to love natural forces transfigured merely by man’s fear would make religious experience a kind of collective hallucination.

The explanation of religion which Durkheim is about to provide amounts according to him to save the reality of religion. For if man worships society transfigured, he worships an authentic reality; real forces. Religion is too permanent, too profound an experience not to correspond to a true reality; and this true reality is not God, then it must be the reality so to speak, immediately below God, namely society.

Explanations of the types:

According to Durkheim, Religion is a division of the world into two kinds of phenomena.

1. The Sacred
2. The Profane

The sacred refers to things human beings set apart; including religious beliefs, rites, deities or anything socially defined as requiring special religious treatment. Profane is just the opposite of Sacred, which is not sacred that is called profane.

On one hand, the sphere of sacred is the area that pertains to the numerous, the transcendental, the extra-ordinary. On the other hand, the sphere of the profane refers to the realm of everyday utilitarian activities. When a number of sacred things maintain relations of co-ordination and sub-ordination with one another so as to form a system of the same kind, this body of corresponding beliefs and rites constitutes a religion.

Objects and behaviors deemed sacred were considered part of the spiritual or religious realm. They were part of rites, objects of reverence or simply behaviors deemed special by religious beliefs. Those things deemed profane were everything else in the world that did not have a religious function or hold religious meaning. But while these two categories are rigidly defined and set apart, they interact with one another and depend on each other for survival.

The sacred world cannot survive without the profane world to support it and give it life and vice versa. In general, those aspects of social life given moral superiority or reverence are considered sacred and all other aspects are part of the profane.

Society creates religion by defining certain phenomena as sacred and others as profane. Those aspects of social reality that are defined as sacred that is that are set apart and deemed forbidden—form the essence of religion. The rest are defined as profane-the everyday, the common place, the utiliarian, the mundane aspects of life. The Sacred brings out an attitude of reverence, respect, mystery, awe and honour. The respect accorded to certain phenomena transforms them from the profane to the sacred. The differentiation between sacred and profane is necessary but not sufficient conditions for the development of religion.

Three other conditions are needed:

1. Religious beliefs
2. Religious rites
3. Church

There must be the development of a set of religious beliefs; a set of religious rites and a church.

The religious beliefs are “the representations which express the nature of sacred things and the relations which they sustain, either with each other or with profane things.”

The religious rites are “the rules of conduct which prescribe how a man should comport himself in the presence of these sacred objects.”

A religion requires a church, or a single overarching moral community. The interrelationships among the sacred beliefs, rites and church led Durkheim to give the definition of religion.

Beliefs and rites or practices unite people in a social community by relating them to sacred things. This collective sharing of beliefs, rituals etc. is essential for the development of religion.

Religion is society transfigured. Transfiguration means society is given the shape of god or religion which we believe and start worshipping. Belief refers to a type of conviction, making the people to do or accept which otherwise they shall not do or shall not accept.

According to Durkheim, there are three types of ritual practices, following from specific sets of beliefs namely positive, negative and piacular practices or rites and practices of expiation. Positive practices refer to those which people are obliged to follow. Negative practices are reverse to positive. It refers to those practices which people are obliged not to follow or practise. Piacular practices refer to the practice of awarding punishment to those who have deviated from the norms and dictates of established beliefs. It is otherwise known as punitive practice.

Durkheim has used the term church here in a symbolic sense. It does not refer to the place of worship. It is symbolic and does not contain its original beliefs. It is added to the concept of the sacred and to the system of beliefs in order to differentiate religion from magic which does not necessarily involve the consensus of the faithful in one church. Religion hence presupposes first the sacred; next the organisation of beliefs regarding the sacred into a group ; finally rites or practices which proceed in a more or less logical manner from the body of beliefs.

General Theory of Religion:

Durkheim’s book “Elementary forms of Religious life” is devoted to elaborating a general theory of religion derived from an analysis of the simplest, most primitive religious institutions. This general theory of religion is otherwise known as his theory of totemism. Instead of Animism or Naturism Durkheim took the totemism among the Australian tribes as the key concept to explain the origin of religion.

According to him, Australian totemism is the most primitive and simple form of religion known to us today. He studied the Australian aborigines called ‘Arunta’ tribes. All the conclusions which Durkheim presupposes the principle that one can grasp the essence of social phenomena, by observing it in its most elementary form. To Durkheim, totemism reveals the essence of religion in its most elementary form.

According to Durkheim totemism is the simplest religion. The essence of totemism is the worship of an impersonal anonymous force, at once immanent and transcendent. This anonymous diffuse force which is superior to men and very close to them is in reality society itself. The principal notions utilized by Durkheim are those of clan and totem. The clan is a group of kindered which is not based on ties of consanguinity. The clan is a human group, the simplest of all, which expresses its identity by associating itself with a plant or animal, with a genus or species of plant or animal.

In the Australian tribes studied by Durkheim the totem is represented in various ways. Each totem has its emblem. In almost-all clans there are objects, pieces of wood or polished stones, which bear a figurative representation of the totem. Ordinary objects, which are referred to as ‘Churinga’ are transfigured once they bear the emblem of the totem. They share the sacred quality that is associated with the totem. Durkheim writes:

“Totemism is the religion, not of certain animals or of certain men or of certain images, but a kind of anonymous and impersonal force which is found in each of these beings, without however being identified with any one of them.

None possesses it entirely, and all participate in it. So independent is it of the particular subjects in which it is embodied that it precedes them just as it is adequate to them. Individuals die; generations pass away and are replaced by others.

But this force remains ever present, living and true to itself. It quickens today’s generation just as it quickened yesterday’s and as it will quicken tomorrows. Taking the word in a very broad sense one might say that it is the god worshipped by each totemic cult; but it is an impersonal god, without a name, without a history abiding in the world, diffused in a countless multitude of things.”

Durkheim’s generalization can be conclusively stated as below:

1. All the essential elements of religious thought and life ought to be found at least in the most primitive religion. Durkheim stated that the first attempt should be made to study religion in its simplest form. Then it can be possible to go deeply into others including the religion in advanced society. To say that totemism is the simplest religion implies an evolutionist conception of religious history. If Durkheim asserts that it is the simplest most elementary religion he is implicitly acknowledging that religion has own evolution from a single origin.
2. More generally Durkheim’s view of religion as socially determined led him to seek to establish causal relation between features of social structure and the content of religious believers and ritual practices.

Raymond Aron writes the sociological interpretation of religion takes two forms:

(a) In totemism men worship their own society without realizing it or the quality of sacredness is attached first of all to the collective impersonal force which is representative of the society itself.

(b) Societies are inclined to create Gods or religions when they are in a state of exaltation. Exaltation means the situations uniting the people and therefore the concept of sacred comes. An exaltation which occurs when social life is intensified.

4. Finally, Durkheim had certain generalizations on the functions of religion.

Harry Alpert has analyzed four important functions of religion:

(i) Disciplinary function

(ii) Cohesive function

(iii) Vitalizing function

(iv) Euphoric function

(i) In disciplinary function religious rituals prepare men for social life by imposing self-discipline and a certain measure of asceticism.

(ii) In cohesive function religious ceremonies bring people together and thus serve to reaffirm their common bonds and to reinforce social solidarity.

(iii) In vitalizing function religious observance maintains and revitalizes the social heritage of the group and helps transmit its enduring values to future generations.

(iv)Finally, religion has a euphoric functions in that it serves to counteract feelings of frustration and loss of faith and certitude by re-establishing the believers sense of well being, their sense of the essential Tightness of the moral world of which they are a part.

Criticisms:

1. Durkheim’s Sociology of religion was purely speculative. According to Goldenweiser, Durkheim’s theory is one sided and psychologically untenable. He argued that a “society possessing the religious sentiment is capable of accomplishing unusual things, but it can hardly produce that sentiment out of itself.”
2. According to some philosophers, by making the social mind, or collective representations the sole source of religion, Durkheim resorted to something quite mysterious in itself and hence failed to give a satisfactory explanation.
3. In coming to the view of the universal distinction of the sacred and the profane, Durkheim believed he had validated his theory of moral authority. But, as the focal point of Durkheim’s definition of religion is concerned, the distinction of the sacred and the profane is applied to substantiate the view that religion has nothing to do with the existence of Gods and spirits.
4. Many anthropologists today no longer accept that totemism is a form of religion at all, but see it as a form of ritual and kinship organisation, which can co-exist with a series of religious institutions.
5. It has been criticized that some of the features of Central Australian totemism to which Durkheim gave particular prominence; such as the regularized ceremonial activities are either absent or exist in quite different from elsewhere.
6. There is no evidence at all that Australian totemism is the earliest form of totemism.
7. Durkheim’s emphasis on figured representations of the totems is questionable, since most of the totems are not so represented.
8. 

Evan Pritchard has given a number of criticisms against Durkheim’s thesis on religion:

(а) Sacred-Profane dichotomy is not universal. Sacred and the Profane are not always antithetical.

(b) Totemism is not necessarily a clan religion.

(c) Totem of the clan need not be the totem of the individual.

(d) Durkheim held that the origin and cause of religion lie in social domain and have nothing to do with sentiments of the individual.

(e) In his theory Durkheim failed to give the weight-age to individual and emotional aspects of religion.

Although religion reinforces social values and promotes social solidarity, it is not the worship of society.

Durkheim’s views are relevant to primitive society; where integration of social institutions and culture is more pronounced. It is less relevant to modern societies where many cultures, social and ethnic groups, specialized organizations and a range of religious reliefs, practices and institutions exist.

In-spite of the above criticisms, sociology of Religion of Emile Durkheim is very much appreciated by the sociologists. The real merit of his analysis is his recognition of the vital social functions that religion plays in society.

 

For more such notes, Articles, News & Views Join our Telegram Channel.

https://t.me/triumphias

Click the link below to see the details about the UPSC –Civils courses offered by Triumph IAS. https://triumphias.com/pages-all-courses.php