Karl Marx, Max Weber and Emile Durkheim offered differing perspectives on the role of religion Essay

Karl Marx, Max weber and Emile Durkheim offered differing perspectives on the role of religion. Choose the theorizer whose insights you prefer and outline how they perceived religion operating soci each(prenominal)y. Discuss why you chose your preferred theorists views over the others.Marx, Durkheim and Weber for each one had different sociological views of the role and function of morality. My preferred theorists views on theology is Karl Marxs as I look his ideas argon more relevant to what Religion actually is. And I break chosen Marxs theory on Religion as I feel that it is the well-nigh similar to my own views on the upshot. His views are more interesting to me as I dont practise any Religion and his views expand on some of my own suppositions that I have had virtually Religion. It in addition has more relevance in society at once as stack are at one time struggling due to the economic down turn which is completely testing peoples faith. at that place is a bigger de cline in this coke as most of the population of the world have more resources and freedom of speech, to decide how they really feel about Religion and arent blind-sighted by the church service anymore. Even if people are not aware of Marxs ideas about Religion I feel that the majority of people would have similar views based on these ideas as times have gotten harder and then making people question their own beliefs. I will also briefly outline each of the theorists fashionings on Religion and then discuss why I chose Karl Marxs theories. Karl Marxs outlook on Religion was that it was a deception of sorts, as it was to give people off-key hope of something better waiting for them as they were being exploited and oppressed by these religious ideals.Marx thought it was a result of a class society because not only when was its aim to ease the bother of oppression it also acted as a alsol of that oppression. (McDonald, 2009) Emile Durkheim thought that Religion brought communitie s together and strengthened them. That all religions acted as a socialising agent and that they shared a coherent system of beliefs and practices serving prevalent human needs and purposes. He also conducted a study on the Australian Aborigines and concluded that Religion was the source of all harmonious social biography. (McDonald, 2009) He felt that religion varies between different societies and ignore influence peoples day to day lives. In 1912 he wrote the Elementary forms of the religious life which showed that all religions have certain features in common.Max Weber had a view thatwasnt too far off of Marxs theory on Religion as he felt that it bonnie was apply to strengthened peoples work ethic and that success through hard work would lead to peoples salvation. He felt that the various religious policies didnt fit with the instruction of Capitalism. Religion is defined as The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or Gods. But when reading Karl Marxs thoughts on the subject it becomes clearer that not only do you need a strong belief to endure what Gods plan is for you solely that it can take a steering your sense of individuality and force people into a socially correct group by practicing the churchs norms.One of his famous analyses of Religion was that it Is the opium of the people.(Goldstein, / McKinnon 2009) Its amusing that Marx used opium in comparison with religion seeing as it was used to help people for a temporary hookup in the 1800s but with more medicines becoming available, that the use of opium eventually became frowned upon. Ironic then, that this is how many people would perceive the church in Ireland today. In Marx, Critical Theory and Religion Marx, McKinnon writes that For most twenty-first century readers, opium means something quite simple and obvious, and the comparison between the two terms seems perfectly literal. Opium is a medicine that kills the pain, distorts reality, and an art ificial source of solace to which some poor souls can become addicted so also religion. This metaphor for me shows that of the three theorists Marx was the most realistic and could see through the organised industry that Religion was and is forever more so today.Durkheims theories make sense and are for me a nice and fluffy way of looking at Religion, but I have a feeling that if he were to see the lane Religion has gone down in modern society would he still feel the uniform about the majority of Religions, for example the scandals in the Catholic church over the recent forty years that are only really surfacing now. And Webers thoughts were more keen as that what was expected of people was to keep their heads down and they would eventually be rewarded with Heaven. Even if in todays society more numbers are in decline of practicing religion, Marxs views on the subject are definitely the most valid.There expectations of people may not be as uttermost(prenominal) as they were ba ck in the 1800s of their followers as they are now, but of the three, Marxs views are the most realistic of what Religion truly is. His ability to see what religion was actually doing to peoples lives back then is remarkable and for hiswords to still have such relevance now in modern society shows that he was extremely perceptive of society. Marxism also assumes that Religion will eventually vaporise and for someone to envisage that from over one hundred years ago is clearly someone who knew what they were lecture about. And that is why I chose Marx.