Carmen Zaldívar

Chapter 4: The functions of Religion

This chapter tries to explain, from an empirical point of view, what is the function of
religion.
He first uses the example of a lectern and a pulpit to explain how the name we give to
things is not always, what determines them. An object can sometimes be identified by
two different names or, on the other hand, two similar objects can be confused in
essence. Therefore, what is it that distinguishes one from the other if is not its essence?
Its context, its purpose, what it is used for? For this reason, in this case it weighs more
what that thing does than what that thing is.
This shows how when studying a discipline it is essential to know its empirical effects,
not just "the entity" itself. This is what intellectualists are in charge of. A first method
they use is the search for the origin and understanding how the object was studied in its
beginning. However, it is very difficult to judge with today's eyes what happened long
ago because they did not have the same access we have today to scientific methods as
well as the development of intellectual capacities.
An example of this could be Tylor's theory of animism whereby he attributes a vital
principle (soul) that gives life to the body. However, it is difficult to prove whether this
theory is right or wrong because we would judge it with modern speculations confusing
the past with contemporary assumptions.
As this method was wrong to study the manifestations of religion, its predecessors, the
functionalists, focused on the contemporary, giving rise to stable and scientific theories.
These functionalists are based on three authors who give different views of the human
sciences. The first is Marx who establishes a political-economic theory. He affirmed
that religion is the opium for the people since it was used by the ruling classes to control
the proletariat. Moreover, the oppressed relied on it to give meaning to their suffering,
being an excuse for not facing the real problem. The second is Durkheim who gives a
sociological vision because for him, the rituals and beliefs of a religion do not seek
anything other than a group identity but this can be broken at any time. Finally, Freud
approaches it from a psychological point of view, explaining through his psychoanalysis
that the symbols that occur in religion do not produce fear in the group and that
everything is part of an antisocial group action.
With these authors, it is understood that religion can be studied from different
epistemological points of view: social, economic, political... Through its manifestations,
it is possible to have causes and empirical consequences that facilitate its knowledge.
Consequently, religion is not studied as a noun but as an adjective: religious symbols,
religious rites... but not religion itself because, as it has already happened in previous
chapters, we cannot conclude here either what is the main function of religion.
This does not imply that functionalists reduce religion to something merely material,
disregarding its theology, they simply try to give another approach in order to improve
the study of this phenomenon.