Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Help please!

    I have come across these two past religion essay titles and the wording of the questions has confused me.

    When they ask about 'extent' of relationships between different things, I can't figure out then exactly what I should include in my answer.

    'There is more to religion than just belief. For instance, religion and religious organisations may help groups to cope with changes such as migration and adjustment to new societies. For some, religion provides the whole basis on which their lives are structured.'
    To what extent do sociological arguements and evidence support this view of the relationship between religious beleifs, religious organisations and social groups?

    'Religion today is more about believing than belonging'
    To what extent do sociological arguements and evidence support this view of the relationship between religious beliefs, religious organisations and social groups in society today?

    Has anybody gone through what to write for this sort of question before?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I WANT THOSE QUESTIONS.

    And yeah, for to what extent you basically say how arugments have and then how they haven't.
    So the first one is essentially:
    Functionalist theory/interpretivist theory
    Then say how arguments disagree:
    Marxist, Feminist, Interpretivist, Weberianm Postmodernism etc. Maybe a bit of secularisation since it talks aobut "belief".
    Then come to a conclusion weighing up the factors and deciding whether the statement is supported.

    For the 2nd it's the same premise, since its got "social groups" in the title that means you talk about religiosity of patterns in connection to this. If it was about secularisation, they'd be other stuff to do.
    believing without belonging (Davie), examples, social groups, women, Working class, THE YOUNG.
    VS
    No: many still belong and believe; middle class, women. Or in new forms: working class, the young, women, middle aged. Or not at all: the young.

    Lovely essay really I want it. Then come to a conclusion again.

    If the last one was in reference to secularisation:

    Davie's believing without belonging, vicarious religion etc.
    VS
    specific criticisms by Bruce
    belonging and believing still exists
    Day = belonging without believing
    rationalists and secularist points - rationalisation, everything is falling, keep brining it back to Davie though and how this counteracts it.
    Durkheim;s views on new religions.
    Disengagement (but this can add to beli without belo!)
    RELIGIOUS PLURALISM - postemodernism and fundamentalists!!

    Conclusion = Davie is right but maybe it's more about NEW forms - postmodernism etc - than the privatisation of belief, definitely a key point though as society changes - Martin and Hamilton. Or is it all part of Stark and Bainbridge's secularisation cycle?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alecangeltess)
    I WANT THOSE QUESTIONS.

    And yeah, for to what extent you basically say how arugments have and then how they haven't.
    So the first one is essentially:
    Functionalist theory/interpretivist theory
    Then say how arguments disagree:
    Marxist, Feminist, Interpretivist, Weberianm Postmodernism etc. Maybe a bit of secularisation since it talks aobut "belief".
    Then come to a conclusion weighing up the factors and deciding whether the statement is supported.

    For the 2nd it's the same premise, since its got "social groups" in the title that means you talk about religiosity of patterns in connection to this. If it was about secularisation, they'd be other stuff to do.
    believing without belonging (Davie), examples, social groups, women, Working class, THE YOUNG.
    VS
    No: many still belong and believe; middle class, women. Or in new forms: working class, the young, women, middle aged. Or not at all: the young.

    Lovely essay really I want it. Then come to a conclusion again.

    If the last one was in reference to secularisation:

    Davie's believing without belonging, vicarious religion etc.
    VS
    specific criticisms by Bruce
    belonging and believing still exists
    Day = belonging without believing
    rationalists and secularist points - rationalisation, everything is falling, keep brining it back to Davie though and how this counteracts it.
    Durkheim;s views on new religions.
    Disengagement (but this can add to beli without belo!)
    RELIGIOUS PLURALISM - postemodernism and fundamentalists!!

    Conclusion = Davie is right but maybe it's more about NEW forms - postmodernism etc - than the privatisation of belief, definitely a key point though as society changes - Martin and Hamilton. Or is it all part of Stark and Bainbridge's secularisation cycle?

    Dont you just love it when everything seems to link up with everything? Iv had a few moments like this in soc when i can seem to write about anything and somehow link it up the the argument
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.