Theories about religion
[3] Euhemerus (about 330–264 BCE) regarded gods as excellent historical persons whom admirers eventually came to worship.
[3] Scientific theories, inferred and tested by the comparative method, emerged after data from tribes and peoples all over the world became available in the 18th and 19th centuries.
Field workers deliberately sent out by universities and other institutions to collect specific cultural data made available a much greater database than random reports.
For example, the anthropologist E. E. Evans-Pritchard (1902–1973) preferred detailed ethnographical study of tribal religion as more reliable.
[citation needed] The functionalists and some of the later essentialists (among others E. E. Evans-Pritchard) have criticized the substantive view as neglecting social aspects of religion.
[citation needed] The view of a uniform progression in folkways is criticized as unverifiable, as the writer Andrew Lang (1844–1912) and E. E. Evans-Pritchard assert.
James George Frazer (1854–1941) followed Tylor's theories to a great extent in his book The Golden Bough, but he distinguished between magic and religion.
In contrast religion is faith that the natural world is ruled by one or more deities with personal characteristics with whom can be pleaded, not by laws.
The theologian Rudolf Otto (1869–1937) focused on religious experience, more specifically moments that he called numinous which means "Wholly Other".
The anthropologist Edward Evan Evans-Pritchard (1902–1973) did extensive ethnographic studies among the Azande and Nuer peoples who were considered "primitive" by society and earlier scholars.
Unlike the previous scholars, Evans-Pritchard did not propose a grand universal theory and he did extensive long-term fieldwork among "primitive" peoples, studying their culture and religion, among other among the Azande.
Loss of faith in the fundamental tenets could not be endured because of its social importance and hence they had an elaborate system of explanations (or excuses) against disproving evidence.
He avoided the subjective and vague concept of group attitude as used by Ruth Benedict by using the analysis of society as proposed by Talcott Parsons who in turn had adapted it from Max Weber.
[36] Geertz held the view that mere explanations to describe religions and cultures are not sufficient: interpretations are needed too.
[38] Developing on the ideas of Ludwig Feuerbach, he saw religion as a product of alienation that was functional to relieving people's immediate suffering, and as an ideology that masked the real nature of social relations.
These claims were limited, however, to his analysis of the historical relationship between European cultures, political institutions, and their Christian religious traditions.
Marxist views strongly influenced individuals' comprehension and conclusions about society, among others the anthropological school of cultural materialism.
Unlike Tylor and Frazer, Freud attempted to explain why religion persists in spite of the lack of evidence for its tenets.
This is in contrast to Tylor and Frazer, who saw religion as a rational and conscious, though primitive and mistaken, attempt to explain the natural world.
Durkheim held the view that the function of religion is group cohesion often performed by collectively attended rituals.
[49] The empirical basis for Durkheim's view has been severely criticized when more detailed studies of the Australian aboriginals surfaced.
The view that religion has a social aspect, at the very least, introduced in a generalized very strong form by Durkheim has become influential and uncontested.
[52] The anthropologist Bronisław Malinowski (1884–1942) was strongly influenced by the functionalist school and argued that religion originated from coping with death.
In the book Weber wrote that modern capitalism spread quickly partially due to the Protestant worldly ascetic morale.
In his 1920 treatment of the religion in China he saw Confucianism as helping a certain status group, i.e. the educated elite to maintain access to prestige and power.
He used the concept of Verstehen (German for "understanding") to describe his method of interpretation of the intention and context of human action.
[35] The rational choice theory has been applied to religions, among others by the sociologists Rodney Stark (1934–2022) and William Sims Bainbridge (born 1940).
[58] They see religions as systems of "compensators", and view human beings as "rational actors, making choices that she or he thinks best, calculating costs and benefits".
Most religions start out their lives as cults or sects, i.e. groups in high tension with the surrounding society, containing different views and beliefs contrary to the societal norm.
But those already happy members of a religious group are difficult to convert as well, since they have strong social links to their preexisting religion and are unlikely to want to sever them in order to join a new one.
