Search

Among many contributions to sociology by Emile Durkheim and Max Weber, their works in the sociology of religion have aroused the most debate and critical evaluation. Different in their way of approach, both Durkheim and Weber were keenly interested in the sociological foundation of religion, and tried to delve into the structure of society through the study of religion. The purpose of my paper is to compare the ways in which Durkheim and Weber accounted for the place of religion in society through their works of The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life and The Ancient Judaism. The first part of this paper presents the basic conceptualization of society and human action. Durkheim gave a foundation to the sociologists and anthropologists known as the functionalists. Functionalism explains every living culture as a functioning and integrated whole, analogous to an organism, and that no part of a culture may be understood except in relation to the whole. Weber was suspicious of this functional analysis of society. First of all, he did not see society as an organic whole but an area where different groups were competing and struggling against one another. Secondly, the entire subjection of individuals to a collectivity was intolerable for him, since he saw the existence of subjective interpretation of social phenomena by each individual. However, Weber revealed the tendency toward duality of individualism and collectivity. It is my primary interest to see how close and on what level Durkheim and Weber approach each other in their theories of religion. The second part of my paper discusses different origins and roles of religion expressed by Durkheim and Weber. Durkheim argued that society was the only empirical reality which had moral ascendancy over the individual and thus was able to create the sacred. God was but a symbol for society. On the other hand, Weber felt that the specific nature of the religion was not a simple function of the social situation of the stratum, however, social influence, economically and politically determined, might have been upon a particular religious case. Finally, the historical as well as contemporary religions in Japan are examined in terms of theories developed by Durkheim and Weber. At a glance Durkheim's theory is quite applicable to Japanese society which is based on collectivity orientation. However, a closer analysis of religious history reveals the process of struggle among status groups such as politicians, priest, and general public, which can be better explained by Weber's theory.