Sociology I · 20 marks

How is the Weberian theory of religion different from that of Durkheim's?

Answered by 5 toppers · CSE 2025

Syllabus: Sociological Thinkers: (a) Karl Marx- Historical materialism, mode of production, alienation, class struggle. (b) Emile Durkheim- Division of labour, social fact, suicide, religion and society. (c) Max Weber- Social action, ideal types, authority, bureaucracy, protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. (d) Talcolt Parsons- Social system, pattern variables. (e) Robert K. Merton- Latent and manifest functions, conformity and deviance, reference groups. (f) Mead - Self and identity.

How toppers approached it

From 3 of the 5 answers · about 370 words · 33% drew a diagram.

Opening

  • A definition2 of 3
  • No separate opening1 of 3

Body

  • Points and prose2 of 3
  • Points1 of 3

Close

  • A summary3 of 3

The toppers’ answers

RajeshwariAIR 2 · CSE 2025 · 365 wordsTheir whole copy

Opening · a definition

None written.

Body · points and prose

Religion is the unified system of belief and practices that have control over society and individual.

Both Durkheim and Weber studied religion since religion form a basic social institution in any society.

Difference between Weberian and Durkheim in theory of Religion :

Close · a summary

DurkheimWeber
→ Religion is the unified system of belief and practices that control individual→ Religion is a social system that have beliefs and practices based on human interpretation
DurkheimWeber
→ Focus on Religion control over the human being→ Focus on individual interpretations of the religion
→ Religion consist of 'sacred' and 'profane' ↳ (forbidden)→ No such separate elements in religion (causal pluralism)
→ Funtions :
i) cohesion
ii) Discipline
iii) cognition
iv) Euphonia→ Functions :
i) Functional : social solidarity
ii) Dysfunctional : if not rationalised.
→ Studied primitive religion ↳ [Totemism]→ Studied complex religion ↳ [Protestantism]
DurkheimWeber
→ Religion and social solidarity was studied→ Religion & Economic relation
eg Protestant Ethic & spirit of capitalism
→ Primitive societies only studied→ World societies was studied.
→ Generalisation on religion was made→ No generalisation insisted on ideal type of religion
→ Religion exist still human exist→ Religion will dilute due to rationalisation
→ Religion is a non-material association of society.→ Insisted on metaphysical things
DurkheimWeber
→ No use of any intermediaries→ stated on godmen, witchmen
→ Religion and science coexist→ Religion dies as science develops

Both Durkheim and Weber realised the significance of religion. Durkheim did positivist study and was criticised as arm chair theorist. Weber did interpretivist study and was criticised for not taking multiple factors.

Hence Durkheim and Weber studies on religion throw light on the essence of religion in society

More on Emile Durkheim

Division of labour, social fact, suicide, and religion and society.

All Sociology I questions on Emile Durkheim