Sociology

5Is pietism a stick for affable budgeIs organized fealty a repel for complaisant switch Is theology a gouge for cordial lurchIs piety a big businessman for societal miscellanea or conservative friendly force preventing br otherwisely change ? There are conflicting arguments about this egress al oneness all the amicable scientists regard pietism as an principal(prenominal) accessible force . Some social theorist is of the remain an eye on that holiness has a conservative pure tone that impedes the authority of scial change and is inclined toward maintaining the status quo . Whereas some other sociologists are of the fascinate that that religion is a substantial tooth root force that paves the vogue for social change To embark on the analysis of the above-named assumption i .e . role of religion in soc ial change , a synopsis of the unmixed sociologists view of the religion as a force of social change forget be quiet helpful Functionalist pedestal , for example , of Durkheim presents twain prime roles of religion i .e . second base and promotion of social solidarity and social integration . This view of religion clearly illustrates that religion is a conservative social force . Karl Marx also labels religion as force that works on preserving the status quo and hinders social change . For Marx , religion is an ideological musical instrument in the manpower of the ruling class to justify their rein and monopolize the social control . He further reinforces the base that religion pietism is the sigh of the oppressed creature , the popular opinion of a stony world and the soul of soulless conditions . It is the opium of the peopleHe asserts that religion rationalizes the present nature of things i .e possession of land and the command of knowledge in clubhouse ) and vit alizes the notions that this instinctive i! s approved by God and unattainable and sacrilegious for people to alter this natural . In this stylus it helps the feudal society and maintains social and policy-making status quo exclusively another classical sociologist , weber , champion the view that religion is a radical social force .

His assumptions are in Durkheim and Marx Giddens Sociology , 1989 ) observes this distinction in the following way weber s literary works on religion take issue from those of Durkheim in concentrating on the connector between religion and social change something to which Durkheim gave little charge . They contrast with the work of Marx because Weber argues that religion is not needs a conservat ive force on the contrary , sacredly inspired movements have often produced dramatic social shiftations Weber bases his empirical suppositions in history and draws his conclusion from investigation of respective(a) societies . He is of the view that ideological movement needed to transform the society according to new forms and necessities , was provided by religious ideas . He provides the example that Calvinist ideology provided abstract impetus for the social , political and particularly economical change and transformed the society from Feudalism to CapitalismWeber asserts that clique of Calvin believed in the notion that a mavin individual could not perform impregnable works or do acts of faith to guarantee one s place in heaven...If you want to get a amply essay, order it on our website: OrderEssay.net

If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: write my essay