Evaluation of Three Scholarly Definitions of Reliigon

Introduction

This essay will discuss and evaluate three scholarly definitions of religion. It will use a range of both primary and secondary sources to determine which is the best definition of religion. The essay will examine and assess the beliefs and theories of Emile Durkheim, Karl Marx, and Sigmund Freud.

Historical Context and Definitions

The word ‘religion’ derives from the Latin words ‘religio’, ‘religere’ and ‘religare’. ‘Religare’ means to bind and ‘religere’ means to repeat, which links into the works and theory of scholar number one, Emile Durkheim. Durkheim believed that religion was more down to a community of people rather than it being individual. In John Bawker’s Oxford Dictionary of World Religions, he is quoted saying, “A religion is 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 into one single moral community called a Church, all those who adhere to them” (Bawker, 1997). This quote suggests that not one person could be religious, and it must be a group of people with the same beliefs and practices to be religious, as he refers to it, a church.

Durkheim’s Perspective

It is important also to note that, like Marx, Durkheim was raised as an atheist and not in a religious community. This could contribute to a different point of view compared to a religious scholar. Durkheim’s definition of religion is valuable as it explains a large number of religious individuals around the world and why there are so many different and diverse religions. However, there are many criticisms of Durkheim’s definition. A key criticism is that Durkheim’s view focuses on religion and the community aspect, but his definition does not address those individuals who work against society and claim they are not religious. Durkheim's approach doesn't fully capture the diversity of religious experiences, including solitary practices and personal spirituality.

Marx’s Critique

I feel that Durkheim’s definition is good but not as comprehensive as Marx’s, who accounts for all religious believers, not only those who work with society, as Durkheim does. Marx’s definition of religion is similar to Durkheim’s in the sense that it is a function of society. However, Marx’s view is very different as it is negative, saying it is “the opiate of the masses” (Marx, 1843). However, scholars such as Raines disagree that it is negative. In his book Marx on Religion, he discusses the possibility that religion, to Marx, was a moral agency for the deprived of society’s class-based system (Raines, 2002). It should also be mentioned that Marx saw two classes of society: the working classes (Proletarians) and the modern capitalists who exploit the working classes (Bourgeois). It was also society’s protest against suffering.

Freud’s Psychological Analysis

Sigmund Freud is the final scholar researched in this essay. Freud, famous for his controversial works in the field of psychology, also attempted, like many psychologists before him, to define religion. Ernest Jones (1957) once wrote that Freud’s work had “evoked more controversy and condemnation than any of his other works” (Jones, 1957). Freud believed religion to be a neurosis and once compared it to one. There are several theories that Freud links with God or religion. One of these is known as the Oedipus Complex, a theory that incorporates a repressed rivalry for their father who also craves their mother’s attention. This links to religion as Freud argues that God can also be a Father figure among believers.

Another theory that incorporates religion is the ‘Primal Horde Theory,’ suggesting that when humans were still very primal and lived in hordes, they would often worship an animal (sometimes killed in ritual) or a totem. According to Freud, this was the start of religion, as eventually, this ‘want’ for a father figure became too much, and the totems became the Gods of modern-day religions. Although Freud was brought up within a Jewish community, he rejected all things religious, and therefore his definition of religion was that it was a mental illness. Freud's approach reduces religion to psychological phenomena, neglecting its cultural and historical contexts.

Conclusion

To conclude, all the scholars in this essay have similar points of view as they all concern society and look at different sociological factors. For example, Marx looks at economics, Durkheim looks at religion within the community, and Freud looks at religion and the individual from a psychological perspective. It is my firm belief that out of all these scholars, Durkheim has the best definition of religion because it’s a definition that works for some cases and looks at the community aspect, which, arguably to some religious believers, is the most important part. I believe that Marx also has a good point of view when it comes to economics because it makes sense that the rich of the time would use a system of religion to continue the exploitation of underpaid workers to make themselves more powerful. Freud does have some compelling arguments when it comes to psychology; however, going back to Ernest Jones’ comment, his beliefs are so reductionist that they offend some believers as he doesn’t look at the bigger picture.

References

• Bawker, J. (1997). Oxford Dictionary of World Religions. Oxford University Press.
• Jones, E. (1957). The Life and Work of Sigmund Freud. Basic Books.
• Marx, K. (1843). A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right. Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher.
• Raines, J. C. (2002). Marx on Religion. Temple University Press.