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 enjoyment of godliness. Choose the theorist whose insights you prefer and outline how they perceived trust run soci every(prenominal)y. Discuss wherefore you chose your preferred theorists views over the others.Marx, Durkheim and Weber each had divergent sociological views of the role and function of godliness. My preferred theorists views on devotion is Karl Marxs as I determine his ideas ar more relevant to what Religion actually is. And I drive chosen Marxs theory on Religion as I feel that it is the nearly similar to my sustain views on the undefended. His views are more interesting to me as I dont practise any Religion and his views spread on some of my own thoughts that I have had somewhat Religion. It alike has more relevance in alliance to twenty-four hour period as state are now struggling due to the economic use up loose which is completely testing mints faith.There is a large decline in this century as most of the population of the solid ground have more re openings and freedom of speech, to decide how they really feel about Religion and arent blind-sighted by the church anymore. Even if people are non 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 thus making people question their own flavours. I go out excessively briefly outline each of the theorists chokeings 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 false hope of something discover waiting for them as they were being exploited and oppressed by these spiritual ideals.Marx thought it was a result of a class society because not only was its aim to ease the pain of oppression it also acted as a tool of that oppression. (McDonald, 2009) Emile Durkheim thought that Religion brought communities together and strengthened them. That all religions acted as a socialising agent and that they shared a dogged system of public opinions and practices serving universal human needs and purposes. He also conducted a study on the Australian Aborigines and concluded that Religion was the source of all harmonious social life. (McDonald, 2009) He felt that religion varies amidst different societies and can influence peoples day to day lives. In 1912 he wrote the Elementary forms of the ghostlike 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 just was used 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 development of Capitalism. Religion is defined as The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a private God or Gods. But whe n 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 entirely that it can pee-pee away your sense of individuality and force people into a socially regulated group by practicing the churchs norms.One of his notable 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 epoch in the 1800s but with more medicines becoming available, that the use of opium lastly 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 utterly literal. Opium is a drug that kills the pain, distorts reality, and an artificial source of solace to which some measly souls can become addicted so also religion. This metaphor for me shows that of the tierce theorists Marx was the most realistic and could see through the organised industry that Religion was and is ever 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 way Religion has gone down in redbrick society would he still feel the same about the majority of Religions, for example the dirts in the Catholic church over the past forty years that are only really surfacing now. And Webers thoughts were more rational 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 extreme as they were back in the 1800s of their follow ers 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 his delivery to still have such relevance now in modern society shows that he was extremely perceptive of society. Marxism also assumes that Religion will eventually disappear and for someone to envisage that from over one deoxycytidine monophosphate years ago is clearly someone who knew what they were talking about. And that is why I chose Marx.