Marxist view of religion

A religion can be seen as a unified system of beliefs and practices which are relative to sacred things and beliefs (Giddens, 1972). It can shape ones thoughts and feelings and gives people a sense of hope and something to believe in. All three main sociologist writers Karl Marx, Max Weber and Emile Durkheim offer different perspectives on religion and how important it is to society. Some of thetheorists chose to have a positive view whilst others argue the unimportance of religion. This essay attempts to discover which theorist has the most accurate perspective of religion in modern times. This is done by explaining the basic ideas regarding to religion put forward by Marx, Weber and Durkheim. Then both Marx's and Durkheim's thought will be compared and contrasted in to determine thedifferences and similarities between their ideas. Finally, it will be explained which one of the theorists views and ideas are the most relevant to contemporary times and why.
Emile Durkheim, Karl Marx and Max Weber all offer a wide array of thoughts and ideas regarding to religion. First, consensus theorist, Emile Durkheim's views of religion will be explained. Durkheim claimed that as citiesgrow, the idea of God withdraws, which leaves more place to the free play of human forces. This causes the individual to become more spontaneous (Moore, 2005). Thus, Durkheim chose to view religion as a function which can strengthen social bonds whilst also integrating individuals into society. Durkheim also believed that religion is divided up into two separate sections; the sacred and theprofane. The sacred consisted of rites, behavior or objects of reverence that religious belief deemed special, whilst the profane was deemed as everything and anything else in the world which did not have any religious meaning or function (Giddens, 1972). Both of these categories depend on each other for survival; the sacred cannot survive without the profane to support it and vice versa. Karl Marxchose to adopt a different perspective and did not find any conceptual utility in religion; however, this did not mean that he was uninterested(Nisbet, 1993). He instead chose to examine the essence of religion from a scientific and objective perspective. According to Marx, religion can be seen as the opiate of the people (Engels, Marx, 1957). Here, Marx is suggesting that just like opium, religion istrying to relieve people of the pain and suffering in their lives. Marx also puts forward the idea that religion is used by its oppressors in order to make people feel better about their lives. Thus, it can be seen that Marx chooses to adopt a negative view of religion. Max Weber can be seen as the only sociologist to place so much scope and emphasis on the subject of religion (Nisbet, 1993).Biographical and textual evidence suggests that biblical religion played a part in shaping and influencing Weber's life and the context of his sociology. Weber's main concern was to attempt to demonstrate that religious ideologies were not mechanically connected to the economic structure of society, however it does shape individuals behavior and actions in everyday life. Weber also came to severalconclusions regarding the remarkable relationship between capitalism and Protestant. According to Weber, the more capitalism had a free hand to alter social distribution, the larger the relationship between capitalism and Protestant. Overall, it can be seen that the three main sociology theorists differ greatly when it comes to ideas regarding to religion.
One must attempt to compare and contrastthe ideas and thoughts of the theorists in order to determine which religious theory is most accurate and relevant in contemporary times. The ideas of both Emile Durkheim and Karl Marx will be compared and contrasted in this section. Both theorists choose to have different ideas regarding religion Durkheim can be seen to view religion as an entity which strengthens social bonds while Marx chose...