Essay on Elementary Forms of Religious Life – This book “The Elementary Forms of Religious Life -1912” seems to be the last of Durkheim’s major works. In this book he brings his analysis of collective or group forces to the study of religion. It could be very well identified that Durkheim’s concern about religion lay in the fact that it was one of the main agencies of solidarity and morality in society.
Durkheim, one of the earliest functionalist theorists, was the first sociologist to apply the functional approach to religion in a systematic way. His theory of religion got its proper form in his famous book “The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, 1912.” It is, indeed, his significant contribution to the field of “sociology of religion.”
Durkheim in his study stressed the social role or functions of the most simple form of religion called totemism of Australian Aborigines. The totem denotes a common object such as an animal, or a plant, and a symbol representing that it is sacred. Each tribal clan is organised around totem.
Image Source: static1.squarespace.com
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The totem, then, is sacred but it is also the symbol of society itself. From this fact Durkheim concluded that when people worship religion, they are really worshipping nothing more than their own society: “divinity is merely society transformed and symbolically conceived.”
What happens, Durkheim argued, is that the members of the clan gather periodically. They participate in some group functions with emotional excitement and feel great ecstacy and elation of a kind which they would never feel alone. Now, the “Men know well that they are acted upon, but they do not know by whom.”
They pick on some nearby item such as a plant or animal, and make this the symbol of both their clan gathering (and society) and their experience of fervour and ecstasy (or religion). Their shared religious belief arises from the society and, in turn, it helps to hold the society together.” – Robertson.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The unity and solidarity of the community is further increased by the rituals that are enacted on religious occasions. These rituals also have the capacity of bringing people together and reaffirming the values and beliefs of the group. They also help to transmit the cultural heritage from one generation to the next. The rituals maintain taboos and prohibitions and those who violate them are punished.
The disobedient or violators of norms may even be required to undergo ritual punishment or purification. The rituals have another function also. In times of individual distress or group crisis the rituals provide help and comfort.
“The social function of shared religious beliefs and the rituals that go with them is so important, Durkheim argued, that every society needs a religion or at least some belief system that serves the same function” – Ian Robertson.
Durkheim rejected theories of ‘Animism’, ‘Naturism’ and ‘Totemism’ fox he regarded them to be inadequate to explain the main distinction between the sacred and the profane. According to him, the group life is the generating force or source or cause of religion. The religious ideas and practices always symbolise the social group.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
The distinction which Durkheim has made between the sacred and profane has important implications for social life as a whole. According to him, the main function of religion is “the creation, reinforcement, and maintenance of social solidarity. So long as society persists so will religion.”
According to Durkheim, much of the social disorder in modern times is due to the fact that people no longer believe deeply in religion and that they have found no satisfying substitute for that. Lacking commitment to a shared belief system, people tend to pursue their private interests without regard for their fellows.
In this book on religion, Durkheim tried to provide an explanation of the basic forms of classification and the fundamental categories of thought itself. In this speculative exploration Durkheim laid the foundation for another specialised field of sociology called “sociology of knowledge”.
Concluding Remarks:
It is true that much of Durkheim’s work on religion was purely speculative. His account of the origins of religion could not be accepted by most of the modern sociologists. Goldenweiser, for example, criticised Durkheim’s theory as 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.”
Some others have stated that “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.” But the real merit of his analysis is his recognition of the vital social functions that religion plays in society.
An Estimate of Durkheim’s Works
1. Contribution to Sociological Theory:
Durkheim never wrote any specific treatise on sociology as such. But his writings on various sociological topics provide relatively convincing answers to many problems in sociological theory.
2. Stressed the Inseparable Relationship between Society and Individual:
Durkheim’s discussions on “collective representations” and “collective conscience” throw light on the relationship between the individual and society. They also “call attention to the ways in which social interaction and relationships significantly influence individual attitudes, ideas, and sentiments.” For Durkheim, the reality of society preceded the individual life.
3. Emphasised the Application of Scientific Methods in the Study of Social Facts:
Durkheim, in a way was a positivist and strongly recommended the application of the methods of physical science to the study of social facts. As a believer in scientific method he sought to deal chiefly with empirical data and to avoid value-judgements. Like Spencer and Karl Marx he did not subscribe to an individualistic theory of society as such.
4. Stressed the Importance of Morals, Values and Social Integration in Social Life:
Durkheim was, however, able to prove convincingly that social facts are facts “sui generis.” His explanations regarding the social and cultural importance of the division of labour and his analysis of the consequences of social solidarity are quite impressive.
He indicated the role of social pressure in areas of human activity, which was not stressed upon by others till then. He has sufficiently emphasised the significance of values and ideals in social life. He also demonstrated the need for empirical research for the science of society.
5. Durkheim a Great Moralist:
Durkheim was a man of character. Throughout his life he was passionately engaged in the moral issues of his time. He probably considered it to be his life task to contribute to the moral regeneration of his French society. He made number of proposals for the improvement of the moral climate of his society.
Durkheim’s deep concern for order and unity in the body social has often made his critics brand him as a thinker with conservative bias opposed to the creative functions of conflict. He, of course, found it impossible, even in theory, to escape “the limits of the contemporary social life.”
Durkheim Gave Priority only to the Society and Not to the Individual? He has made “social facts” central in his methods. A social fact is a phase of behaviour – thinking, feeling or acting – which has a coercive nature. Social facts involve rules and regulations, systems of procedure, and sets of customary beliefs.
They have super-individual value. It appears that in his treatment of social facts and collective conscience. Durkheim almost completely neglected the social importance of individual decision. “Society, is real, to be sure, but so is the individual and the two, it should be remembered, is always in interaction. Giving priority to one or the other, is misleading in the long” – L.A. Coser.