Sociology Unit 3 - Religion - 23th Jan 2012 - Notes - Disscussion and more
Scroll to see replies
the exam was actually not too bad..loved the functionalist question. i reviced that the most
lets just hope people knew your were lieing!
Original post by zavvi16
Trust me my friend the 18 marker is going to marxism ideology question the reason how i know is my teacher has a friend who he he said was the cheif examiner for soicology he told i couldnt say any more but that Marxism and ideology was very likely to come up
lets just hope people knew your were lieing!
Original post by eyre2
the exam was actually not too bad..loved the functionalist question. i reviced that the most
lets just hope people knew your were lieing!
lets just hope people knew your were lieing!Lol!! The awkward moment your exposed as full of crap
The 9 marker worried me. I fear my points were too similar:
1) Cultural defence - using religion to preserve their native norms and values.
2) Socialising - using places of worship as points for socialising and feeling part of a community.
3) Theodicy of disprivilege - using religion as an emotional crutch when they may experience discrimination.
The 18 marker was okay - I feel like I had a lot to talk about.
> I started with the definitional and methodological issues with measuring religious belief and practice. From that I went into Bruce and his quantitative argument, saying membership isn't partial, it's just gone altogether.
> Then I think I went to Stark and Bainbridge and how religion is cyclical and may be experiencing a loss of commitment now but in the future it will thrive and this can be seen in fundamentalist religions.
> It's also seen in NRMs and I talked about Heelas and Woodhead and the move from the congregational domain to the holistic milieu. I said how sects and cults are usually quite short-lived though so lifelong membership is unlikely.
> Then, of course, Davie, saying believing without belonging and vicarious religion are taking over so religion is simply private and invisible.
> I quickly looked at the idea of choosing not to be lifelong members and how Marxists and feminists don't see religion as a choice and see it isntead as a ubiquitus force. I talked a bit about functionalists and phenomenologists see religion as necessary for society to function.
> Then I think I stopped their and concluded with postmodernism saying that religion is individualistic and as a meta-narrative its dead so people are just making sense of the world on their own.
I loved the 33 marker!
> Started off talking about Durkheim as a founding figure of sociology unsurprisingly writing about the social consequences of religion, thereofre providing an observation free of religious fervour contaminating it.
> I talked about Durkheim's views of worshipping the sacred was actually worshipping society but used Worsley and Mestrovic to criticise this and I said how its outdated and can't apply to contemporary society.
> I went on to neo-functionalists and said they provide a more contemporary view. I focussed on Bellah and his idea of civil religion and how it applies to multi-cultural societies like America. Then Parsons and Malinowski acknowledging the comforting effects of religion. I said how these theorists may still be seen as outdated but phenomenology, a much more contemporary theory, has echoes of functionalism in it.
> I said that functionalism fails to look at the conflict religion can cause, giving contemporary examples of the gay priest in St. Albans and fundamentalism reinforcing gender boundaries. I talked about Marxism and feminism and how religion legitimates class and gender inequality which functionalists ignore.
> I said that functionalism also ignores the idea of religion as a soure of social change, giving examples like the Saffron Revolution or Liberation Theology, showing how it isn't useful for religion today.
> I concluded saying that functionalism is just too outdated to be useful to understand religion today and even though phenomenology echoes functionalism it still isn't very central anymore. I finished with postmodernism rejecting any views of religion because, as a meta-narrative, it's irrelevant.
1) Cultural defence - using religion to preserve their native norms and values.
2) Socialising - using places of worship as points for socialising and feeling part of a community.
3) Theodicy of disprivilege - using religion as an emotional crutch when they may experience discrimination.
The 18 marker was okay - I feel like I had a lot to talk about.
> I started with the definitional and methodological issues with measuring religious belief and practice. From that I went into Bruce and his quantitative argument, saying membership isn't partial, it's just gone altogether.
> Then I think I went to Stark and Bainbridge and how religion is cyclical and may be experiencing a loss of commitment now but in the future it will thrive and this can be seen in fundamentalist religions.
> It's also seen in NRMs and I talked about Heelas and Woodhead and the move from the congregational domain to the holistic milieu. I said how sects and cults are usually quite short-lived though so lifelong membership is unlikely.
> Then, of course, Davie, saying believing without belonging and vicarious religion are taking over so religion is simply private and invisible.
> I quickly looked at the idea of choosing not to be lifelong members and how Marxists and feminists don't see religion as a choice and see it isntead as a ubiquitus force. I talked a bit about functionalists and phenomenologists see religion as necessary for society to function.
> Then I think I stopped their and concluded with postmodernism saying that religion is individualistic and as a meta-narrative its dead so people are just making sense of the world on their own.
I loved the 33 marker!
> Started off talking about Durkheim as a founding figure of sociology unsurprisingly writing about the social consequences of religion, thereofre providing an observation free of religious fervour contaminating it.
> I talked about Durkheim's views of worshipping the sacred was actually worshipping society but used Worsley and Mestrovic to criticise this and I said how its outdated and can't apply to contemporary society.
> I went on to neo-functionalists and said they provide a more contemporary view. I focussed on Bellah and his idea of civil religion and how it applies to multi-cultural societies like America. Then Parsons and Malinowski acknowledging the comforting effects of religion. I said how these theorists may still be seen as outdated but phenomenology, a much more contemporary theory, has echoes of functionalism in it.
> I said that functionalism fails to look at the conflict religion can cause, giving contemporary examples of the gay priest in St. Albans and fundamentalism reinforcing gender boundaries. I talked about Marxism and feminism and how religion legitimates class and gender inequality which functionalists ignore.
> I said that functionalism also ignores the idea of religion as a soure of social change, giving examples like the Saffron Revolution or Liberation Theology, showing how it isn't useful for religion today.
> I concluded saying that functionalism is just too outdated to be useful to understand religion today and even though phenomenology echoes functionalism it still isn't very central anymore. I finished with postmodernism rejecting any views of religion because, as a meta-narrative, it's irrelevant.
Original post by ToyosiBaby
I spoke about
1. The fact that they are more likely to be in the WC social group and thus more likely to participate in religion
2. The fact that they are minority compared to other ethnic groups such as the whites, which means that if say four ethnic minorties were involved in religion, this ratio may equate to only 2 white people. pretty much
3. I CANNOT REMEMBER lol!! It was a pretty straightforward common sense guess though :/
1. The fact that they are more likely to be in the WC social group and thus more likely to participate in religion
2. The fact that they are minority compared to other ethnic groups such as the whites, which means that if say four ethnic minorties were involved in religion, this ratio may equate to only 2 white people. pretty much
3. I CANNOT REMEMBER lol!! It was a pretty straightforward common sense guess though :/
No it was talking about immigration, cultural defence and cultural transition not working class
Original post by Yellowranger
No it was talking about immigration, cultural defence and cultural transition not working class
no but u cud have sed as some ethnic minorities (Bangladeshi/african carribean) are most likely to be in the poorest 5th of the population means they are dispriviliged and thus find solace in religion>
i think!i hope so anyway cuz thats what i put:!
Original post by husn
no but u cud have sed as some ethnic minorities (Bangladeshi/african carribean) are most likely to be in the poorest 5th of the population means they are dispriviliged and thus find solace in religion> i think!
i hope so anyway cuz thats what i put:!
i think!i hope so anyway cuz thats what i put:!
Yes but the working class includes more people than the ethnic minority
Original post by ASKendrew
Original post by ASKendrew
That's the same as I thought. The way the question was worded was weird!
Yeahh that's exactly what i wrote about XD
Original post by ASKendrew
That's the same as I thought. The way the question was worded was weird!
That's the one I'm most worried about, so hopefully the grade boundaries are nice to us!
Original post by -Haz-
Oh good, I wasn’t the only person who did that then. When people were saying it was a secularisation question I was a bit worried because I only briefly mentioned secularisation (one paragraph). The main points in my essay were to do with NRMs and spiritual shoppers, with a bit on postmodernism and globalisation, and some reasons as to why sects and cults are short lived.
I don’t think we misinterpreted it (at least I hope not). It asked us to assess the view that most people aren’t life-long members of religion. I didn’t take it as a question on secularisation at all. Hopefully we were right
I don’t think we misinterpreted it (at least I hope not). It asked us to assess the view that most people aren’t life-long members of religion. I didn’t take it as a question on secularisation at all. Hopefully we were right
Yeah I did exactly the same! Hope it was somewhat in the right direction! Best of luck with it... I'm interested in how you did come March!
Original post by bethany18
Question two was a bit confusing, didnt really know exactly what they were looking for, sort of just wrote everything i knew a load of different stuff, my structure was really bad & i'm not sure if i fully answered the question but i put a lot of stuff down so im hoping i can pick up a few marks. I found my self writing about the same amount on that question as the 33 marker 
nevermind. Overall, i think it was a pretty good paper & i think the grade boundaries will be high this time.
nevermind. Overall, i think it was a pretty good paper & i think the grade boundaries will be high this time.Looks like everyone had a bit of trouble with the second question. I just kept writing stuff down haha, I didn't really have a very clear structure which could mess things up a bit..
Original post by helpmekid
for the 33 marker i wrote about functionlists, Marxist and Weber social change? is that write?
Yep, I should think so!
Original post by johyy
in your face!! i knew you were wrong...thankl goodness globalisation didn't come up!!!!
Original post by eyre2 lets just hope people knew your were lieing!
lets just hope people knew your were lieing!LMAO!! Glad I didn't pay much attention to that post!
Original post by Yellowranger
No it was talking about immigration, cultural defence and cultural transition not working class
true but you can say that because they make up most of the wc and the wc are predominantly in religion..then this is whh..it is definitely a credible answer
Couldn't have asked for a better paper seriously... Halfway through the 18 marker I realised I wasn't referring back to the question so I did some last minute mark saving.
Theories of religion, just wow. Everyone should have been buzzing at that. I don't even know what the other question was about, something about NAMs.
I did functionalism, marxism, weber, fundamentalism, secularisation and post modernism and linked to the question throughout and applied theories to real life examples. I'm going for A* and if I can't get it on a paper as easy as this then I don't know :P
Good luck everyone for results!
Theories of religion, just wow. Everyone should have been buzzing at that. I don't even know what the other question was about, something about NAMs.
I did functionalism, marxism, weber, fundamentalism, secularisation and post modernism and linked to the question throughout and applied theories to real life examples. I'm going for A* and if I can't get it on a paper as easy as this then I don't know :P
Good luck everyone for results!
Original post by Yellowranger
Yes but the working class includes more people than the ethnic minority
I think it’d be fine to say they’re more likely to be working class. It doesn’t matter that not all working class people are ethnic minorities, you could say that about anything. Not everyone who is marginalised is an ethnic minority, yet marginalisation would probably be another acceptable reason.
Original post by lukex20
Couldn't have asked for a better paper seriously... Halfway through the 18 marker I realised I wasn't referring back to the question so I did some last minute mark saving.
Theories of religion, just wow. Everyone should have been buzzing at that. I don't even know what the other question was about, something about NAMs.
I did functionalism, marxism, weber, fundamentalism, secularisation and post modernism and linked to the question throughout and applied theories to real life examples. I'm going for A* and if I can't get it on a paper as easy as this then I don't know :P
Good luck everyone for results!
Theories of religion, just wow. Everyone should have been buzzing at that. I don't even know what the other question was about, something about NAMs.
I did functionalism, marxism, weber, fundamentalism, secularisation and post modernism and linked to the question throughout and applied theories to real life examples. I'm going for A* and if I can't get it on a paper as easy as this then I don't know :P
Good luck everyone for results!
im wanting an a* too ...what did you write for the 18 marker
Well, thank you AQA, I think this was an ok paper! This is what I put for my questions
9 Marker:
- Cultural Defense (groups such as muslims may face discrimination because of acts such as 9/11 etc, religeon comforts them= makes them bigger)
- When ethnic groups to move to different countys, (like england) they bring their religeon, more people, bigger majority.
- Deprevation (ethnic groups may not find jobs or money etc, religeon supports them through times of deprevation= more people join)
18 Marker (this was the hardest I found):
Intro: started off with 20th century life style (people work hard and on sundays, may not have time for religeous practice such as church or mosque attendance)
Grace Davie, she believes that secularisation or loss in chirch statistics is because "people are believing without belonging" Also, got phenomologists in there like peter burger who said Religeon is a personal thing, down to individual choice, because people pick and choose (spiritual shopping) part of their beliefs is i.e not go to church.
Postmodernists and world accomadating movements both agree that religeon is a personal thing, not a social thing, so that would give the idea that people are less religeous (to the public eye)
A02: Feminism, they suggest that women are less likely to be religeous because of the discrimination and patriarchy within institutions. but this is obviously critised by statistics that clearly show that more women attend religeous practices and 80% of NRM's overall are women... so.
I didn't do a conclusion for this (which is silly of me) but I was reving up for the 33 marker... I also don't think I wrote enough, but I don't think i've included all I actually wrote on my paper in here, so. Meh.
33 Marker:
Intro: Durkheim's research.
Functions of the church.
- Marxism (how can social solidarity be acheived when everyone is being controlled and 'drugged' by the hierarchy? - Karl Marx- Religeon is the opiate to the masses'
- Malinowski - studied pacific islanders and found they came together in times of need (social Solidarity)
- Leach (1988) - proves there is hierarchy within religeon because 80% of bishops were educated through oxenbridge or other public schools and have many seats in the house of lords (this shows there is not social solidarity, and so functionalism theorys do not apply to current religeon)
- Giddens - argues that durkheim's study is still the most influential study of religeon in sociology.
- Mary Daly (Feminism) - studied roman catholic church, loads of examples of patrichary and sexism in religeous teachings, SO many examples..
- Theologists critisize feminism (dunno if it was actually theologists though?)
Ethical issues: psychological harm (how do we find out about how functionalism still applies to religeon? We can't ask fundamentalist islamic groups for example because it may be painful for them to speak about their beliefs.)
- Culture Bias, we mainly concentrate on western societies and our own, so this doesn't apply to other places.
- Confidentiality, most religeous people do not appreciate talking about their religeon because it's a personal thing, they are likely not to send back questionaires for example.
Theoretical problems: Ethnocentric, durkheim's missionaires were ethnocentric and he studied all of his evidense on 'social solidarity' from books, which is flawed evidense. So, none of his findings can really be generalised to all religeons.
Conclusion: All theorys (marxism, feminism & functionalism) hold great explanations to modern religeon, but it's very important to understand the reality that Religeon, in current times, is causing a lot of conflict and war.
HAZZA!
Hope you all did well
(sorry is theres loads of spelling mistakes and bad grammer, in a rush!)
UPDATE: I got an A for this paper
9 Marker:
- Cultural Defense (groups such as muslims may face discrimination because of acts such as 9/11 etc, religeon comforts them= makes them bigger)
- When ethnic groups to move to different countys, (like england) they bring their religeon, more people, bigger majority.
- Deprevation (ethnic groups may not find jobs or money etc, religeon supports them through times of deprevation= more people join)
18 Marker (this was the hardest I found):
Intro: started off with 20th century life style (people work hard and on sundays, may not have time for religeous practice such as church or mosque attendance)
Grace Davie, she believes that secularisation or loss in chirch statistics is because "people are believing without belonging" Also, got phenomologists in there like peter burger who said Religeon is a personal thing, down to individual choice, because people pick and choose (spiritual shopping) part of their beliefs is i.e not go to church.
Postmodernists and world accomadating movements both agree that religeon is a personal thing, not a social thing, so that would give the idea that people are less religeous (to the public eye)
A02: Feminism, they suggest that women are less likely to be religeous because of the discrimination and patriarchy within institutions. but this is obviously critised by statistics that clearly show that more women attend religeous practices and 80% of NRM's overall are women... so.
I didn't do a conclusion for this (which is silly of me) but I was reving up for the 33 marker... I also don't think I wrote enough, but I don't think i've included all I actually wrote on my paper in here, so. Meh.
33 Marker:
Intro: Durkheim's research.
Functions of the church.
- Marxism (how can social solidarity be acheived when everyone is being controlled and 'drugged' by the hierarchy? - Karl Marx- Religeon is the opiate to the masses' - Malinowski - studied pacific islanders and found they came together in times of need (social Solidarity) - Leach (1988) - proves there is hierarchy within religeon because 80% of bishops were educated through oxenbridge or other public schools and have many seats in the house of lords (this shows there is not social solidarity, and so functionalism theorys do not apply to current religeon) - Giddens - argues that durkheim's study is still the most influential study of religeon in sociology. - Mary Daly (Feminism) - studied roman catholic church, loads of examples of patrichary and sexism in religeous teachings, SO many examples.. - Theologists critisize feminism (dunno if it was actually theologists though?)Ethical issues: psychological harm (how do we find out about how functionalism still applies to religeon? We can't ask fundamentalist islamic groups for example because it may be painful for them to speak about their beliefs.)
- Culture Bias, we mainly concentrate on western societies and our own, so this doesn't apply to other places.
- Confidentiality, most religeous people do not appreciate talking about their religeon because it's a personal thing, they are likely not to send back questionaires for example.
Theoretical problems: Ethnocentric, durkheim's missionaires were ethnocentric and he studied all of his evidense on 'social solidarity' from books, which is flawed evidense. So, none of his findings can really be generalised to all religeons.
Conclusion: All theorys (marxism, feminism & functionalism) hold great explanations to modern religeon, but it's very important to understand the reality that Religeon, in current times, is causing a lot of conflict and war.
HAZZA!
Hope you all did well
(sorry is theres loads of spelling mistakes and bad grammer, in a rush!)
UPDATE: I got an A for this paper
(edited 11 years ago)
I think the paper went ok, but I'm dreading that I misinterpretted the 18 mark question wrong :/ I hope not, most people seemed to have written similar things to me in my school. I wrote:
Postmodernism - people now spiritual shoppers, less likely to stick to one religion.
Secularisation - Church membership has declined along with church attendance, which shows how people are no longer being 'committed' to their religion.
Davie - believing without belonging, may have a lifelong religious belief, but Bruce argued that this was unlikely, as their beliefs can't be that strong.
Giddens - Cosmopolitanism (reflexive thinking, more likely to change their beliefs as they are open to new ideas) and the contrary reaction of Fundamentalism (life-long commitment)
Existential Security Theory - people who are poor are more likely to depend on religion for existential security, but because the population in third world countries is higher than in the west, those who have a 'life-long' religion will be a greater proportion to those who do not.
I was mostly just building off what was in the Item :P
I wasn't too sure about the first question, I wrote about cultural defence, cultural transition and waffled on about how people from traditional Eastern religions who migrate to Britain often have a higher religous participation because their religons demand higher commitment :/
I loved the functionalist essay, but I'm not sure I had enough time to explain most of the criticisms. Plus, I can imagine the grade boundaries being really high on this exam - really hoping for 90% or higher to get that A*!
How did everyone else find the exam?
Postmodernism - people now spiritual shoppers, less likely to stick to one religion.
Secularisation - Church membership has declined along with church attendance, which shows how people are no longer being 'committed' to their religion.
Davie - believing without belonging, may have a lifelong religious belief, but Bruce argued that this was unlikely, as their beliefs can't be that strong.
Giddens - Cosmopolitanism (reflexive thinking, more likely to change their beliefs as they are open to new ideas) and the contrary reaction of Fundamentalism (life-long commitment)
Existential Security Theory - people who are poor are more likely to depend on religion for existential security, but because the population in third world countries is higher than in the west, those who have a 'life-long' religion will be a greater proportion to those who do not.
I was mostly just building off what was in the Item :P
I wasn't too sure about the first question, I wrote about cultural defence, cultural transition and waffled on about how people from traditional Eastern religions who migrate to Britain often have a higher religous participation because their religons demand higher commitment :/
I loved the functionalist essay, but I'm not sure I had enough time to explain most of the criticisms. Plus, I can imagine the grade boundaries being really high on this exam - really hoping for 90% or higher to get that A*!
How did everyone else find the exam?
Original post by StitchMad
When is results day for the January exams?
I think it's the 8th March
Original post by Azwozzle
I think it's the 8th March
Good stuff, thanks!
Original post by StitchMad
Good stuff, thanks!
I'd look forward to it but I still have my English Language exam on Wednesday - fun fun fun! Although I think the exam today went better than I expected.
Original post by Azwozzle
I'd look forward to it but I still have my English Language exam on Wednesday - fun fun fun! Although I think the exam today went better than I expected.
It was a pleasant surprise when I turned over the exam paper and saw the functionalism question.. haha. Good luck in your English Language... I had mine on Friday 13th at 13:00... how is that for bad luck?!
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Sociology Help Thread
- Over 500 questions on AQA Bio Unit 4 + Current Spec and old Spec papers + MS!
- A-level Exam Discussions 2024
- Applied science unit 3
- KCL not replied to me yet
- BTEC Health And Social Care Level 3 Study Group 2020/2021
- do i do enough studying for a levels?
- a level study : BLOG
- A-level Sociology Study Group 2022-2023
- Csm womenswear ba
- I am looking at my GCSE grades from 2017
- Edexcel A-Level Religious Studies June 12,19,26th
- About IAL series
- Revision Struggles?! Join the 2023 TSR All Day Revision Thread!
- NEED HELP with KC equilibrium question please!
- Help For AS AQA Psychology Students
- BTEC applied science Unit 3 2023
- Official GCSE RS Help Chat
- AQA A Level Sociology Paper 2 (7192/2) - 9th June [Exam Chat]
- Unit 14 IT Service Delivery Jan 2023 Exam Discussion
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 month ago
OCR A-level Sociology Paper 3 (H580/03) - 14th June 2023 [Exam Chat]Sociology
159
Last reply 3 months ago
OCR A-level Sociology Paper 2 (H580/02) - 9th June 2023 [Exam Chat]Sociology
209
Trending
Last reply 1 month ago
OCR A-level Sociology Paper 3 (H580/03) - 14th June 2023 [Exam Chat]Sociology
159
Last reply 3 months ago
OCR A-level Sociology Paper 2 (H580/02) - 9th June 2023 [Exam Chat]Sociology
209
