Sociological Cultural Studies

Sociological Cultural Studies

The place of religion in society

Document Type : .

Author
Alireza Shojaeizand
Associate Professor of Sociology, Faculty of Humanities, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
10.30465/scs.2026.54117.3125
Abstract
Introduction
Place in this discussion means the "place" and "position" that religion, as an influential social structure, has occupied in the formed situations of collective life and, according to that, has reached a relationship with other social sectors and established connections. The answers given to the question of the place of religion are typically a function of the religious scholar's prior understanding and expectation of religion, which itself stems from the dominant discourse, the considerations he has gained from its historical history in a particular context, and the prevalent understanding that exists among its followers.
Materials& Method
In reviewing this literature, we have gone to three prominent sociologists who have different views on this subject. The examination focuses on the theories of Marx, Tocqueville, and Parsons concerning the place of religion in social life and on the different intellectual and social contexts through which they addressed this issue.
By reflecting on these three, we can arrive at two different references and paths in recognizing and determining the place of religion:
1. The dominant discourse and ideology accepted by the theorist;
2. The religion itself, which has been the subject of their study and has directly or indirectly answered this question.
In the first, religion is the subject and its place is determined by scholars according to the discourse and ideology involved. In the second, however, it itself is the one who claims and answers this question and calls upon its followers to strive to realize it.
The difference that arises in this regard is due to two factors. One is due to the reality facing the theorist and the other is related to his prior perspective. That is, whether the environmental realities of his period induce religion as an independent variable or a dependent variable; and whether his theoretical view and approach to religion is reductionist or non-reductionist. The effects of these elements can be clearly seen in the differences between these three theorists. They are completely different in environmental realities and in theoretical foundations they have varying degrees of reductionism, from strong to mild and even milder.
Discussion and Results
Apart from that negative view of religion, Marx has another theory that is more appropriate and that departs from that basic and well-known view. This theory can be found exclusively in the article "On the Jewish Question" and the criticism he made of Bruno Bauer's approach and strategy. What is important to us in this discussion is, first, the content of the answer he gave to the question of the place of religion, and second, the taint of this answer with her particular prejudices and orientations toward religion and the state.
While Bauer, based on her extreme strategy, did not see any place for religion in social life, Marx suggests civil society for it, because it is the place where individual interests and desires are proposed and pursued, and where conflicts emerge and arise.
Tocqueville's main issue, as the title of his book suggests, is "democracy." However, he pursues it more than the state, political structure, and the mechanism for electing rulers, but rather the habits and morals of individuals in society. It is through this path that he arrives at religion and its necessity in social life. The roles and functions that he attributes to religion in society and politics are typically indirect and unintentional; meaning that they are not targeted or demanded from the religious perspective.
Tocqueville does not provide a clear and positive answer to the question of the place of religion. What is certain, and what can be gleaned from his support for laicism, is that he does not tolerate the doctrinal and even institutional presence of religion in the public sphere; while emphasizing its indirect effects as morality and religious piety; and that is through the people who have been taught and adhered to it. The appropriate place for religion, therefore, is primarily in the hearts of ordinary people, and above that, its visible presence in the family and marital life, and finally in shaping the culture, customs, and temperaments of society.
Parsons, following Durkheim, also paid attention to the most important social sign of entering the modern era, namely "structural differentiation", but he pursued it in a different channel than institutional changes. Maintaining the agency and playing the role of religion in the new conditions will no longer be from an institutional position; rather, it will be through the lasting effects it has directly on the individual, which he also transmits and disseminates through his movements and movements in various social situations.
The revivalist Protestantism of the fifteenth century in Europe was motivated and conscious of religion and occurred with the prevention of protestant priests; In America, however, it began with immigration and a break from the historical and institutional constraints of religion, and was followed by the emergence of men of action in various social spheres. The religious situation in Parsons' time had reached a stage where, except among individuals, no other trace of it could be found in the institutional structure of society.
Based on cybernetic order and logic, each system is controlled and guided by that subsystem that has more and higher information. On this basis, Parsons places culture at the forefront, and as a result, religion, as one of the main components of culture, assumes a role as a model and norm-setting.
laicism, as a common response of all three theorists, is more than an explanatory theory based on the requirements of religion and the state; it is an ideological decision and strategy, based on the expectations they had of them and the goals they had for society and its individuals. An example of this expected response can be found in Marx's prejudice against religion, which he considered a false consciousness and ideology justifying class relations. For Tocqueville, laicism arose from the anti-church context of the French Revolution and from the liberalism that matured in the American experience of democracy. Parsons's path to this idea was slightly different, drawing on the social theology of Protestant Christianity, which had been strengthened in America, rather than on other ideologies.
Conclusion
From the examination of the reviewed theories that have answered this question, it became clear that all of them are similar in terms of having an ideological character, but different in terms of their selection. The accuracy and validity of these theories, in our opinion, is a function of their relevance to the subject and the case under consideration. For example, the deductive approach that dominates Marx's theory of religion has deprived her of the possibility of an appropriate response in general, because he has paid no attention to the social theology of religions and the influential differences between them, and has drawn everything based on her own prior attitude and expectations of religion. This defect is mitigated in Tocqueville and Parsons to the extent that they have shown loyalty to the Christian approach. Another advantage of their response may be that there were a remarkable affinity and compatibility between liberal expectations and the Protestant teachings emerging in America regarding the place of religion.
Keywords
Reductionism
Laicity
Social theology
Liberal Protestantism
Privatization of Religiosity
Subjects
برگر، پیتر ال‌. (13۹۷) سایبان مقدس: عناصر نظریة جامعه‌شناختی دین؛ ترجمة ابوالفضل مرشدی. تهران: ثالث.
توکویل، آلکسی. (13۴۷) تحلیل دموکراسی در آمریکا؛ ترجمة رحمت‌الله مقدم‌مراغه‌ای. تهران: زوار با همکاری فرانکلین.
توکویل، آلکسی. (13۶۵) انقلاب فرانسه و رژیم پیش از آن؛ ترجمة محسن ثلاثی. تهران: نقره.
دورکیم، امیل. (1383) صور بنیانی حیات دینی؛ ترجمة باقر پرهام. تهران: نشر مرکز.
سیدنتاپ‌، لری‌. (۱۳۷۴) توکویل؛‌ ترجمة‌ حسن‌ کامشاد. تهران:. طرح‌ نو.
شجاعی‌زند، علی‌رضا. (1381) عرفی‌شدن‌ در تجربة‌ مسیحی‌ و اسلامی؛‌ تهران: مرکز بازشناسی‌ اسلام‌ و ایران‌.
شجاعی‌زند، علی‌رضا. (1394) دین در زمانه و زمینة‌ مدرن؛ تهران: پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی.
شجاعی‌زند، علی‌رضا. (1398) تحویل‌گرایی در مطالعات جامعه‌شناختی دین؛ فصلنامة‌ قبسات (س. 24 ش. 91) (ص. 96-59). 
صدری، احمد. (۱۳۸۷) بررسی جامعه‌شناختی نقش دین در جامعه مدنی.
 https://www.islahweb.org/topic/thought    http://www.islahweb.org/node/1987
صدری، احمد. (۱۴۰۱) مکان دین در آیندة ایران سکولار و مردم‌سالار.                   https://www.zeitoons.com/67847
مارکس‌، کارل‌. (1381) دربارة‌ مسئلة‌ یهود؛ گامی‌ در نقد فلسفة‌ حق‌ هگل‌؛ ترجمة‌ مرتضی‌ محیط‌. تهران: اختران‌.
مارکس، کارل. فردریش انگلس. گئورگی پلخانف. (۱۳۷۹) لودویگ فوئرباخ و ایدئولوژی آلمانی؛ ترجمة پرویز بابایی. تهران: چشمه.
وبر، ماکس‌. (1371) اخلاق‌ پروتستان‌ و روح‌ سرمایه‌داری‌؛ ترجمة‌ عبدالمعبود انصاری‌. تهران: سمت‌.
Bell, Daniel. (1980) Sociological Journeys, Essays 1960-1980, London.
Bellah. Robert. (1964) Religious Evolution; In: American Sociological Review; 29(3), 358-374.
Bellah, Robert N. (1970) Civil Religion in America; In: Beyond Belief: Essay on Religion in a Post- Industrial World, New York: Harper & Row.
Glock, Charles Y. & Rodney Stark, (1965) Religion and Society in Tension; Chicago: Rand McNally.
James, William. (1982) The Varieties of Religious Experience; U. S. A.: Penguin Book.
Kahan, Alan S. (2015) Checks and Balances for Democratic Souls: Alexis de Tocqueville on Religion in Democratic Societies; American Political Thought; 4(1), 100-119.   https://doi.org/10.1086/679757
Lidz, Victor. (1982) Religion and Cybernetic Concepts in the Theory of Action; In: Sociological Analysis, 43(4), Talcott Parsons on Religion, 287-305.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3710829
Marx, Karl. (1992) Early Writings; trans. Rodney Livingstone and Gregor Benton; London: Penguin Classics.
Mews, Stuart. (1975) Religion in the social theories of Talcott Parsons; In: Religion, 5(1), 69–77.
 https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-721X(75)90030
Parsons, Talcott. (1937 org.) The structure of social action: A study in social theory with special reference to a group of recent European writers. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Parsons, Talcott. (1963) Christianity and modern industrial society; In: E. Tiryakian (ed.) Sociological Theory, Values and Sociocultural Change; Glencoe, Ill: Free Press. 33-70.
Parsons, T. (1966) Religion in a modern pluralistic society; In: Journal of Religious Research. 7(3), 125–146.  https://doi.org/10.2307/3509920
Parsons, T. (1974) Religion in Postindustrial America: The Problem of Secularization; In: Social Research, 41(2), 193–225.  http://www.jstor.org/stable/40970177
Parsons, Talcott. (2007) American society: A theory of the societal community. Edited and with an introduction by Giuseppe Sciortino. Boulder, CO: Paradigm
Poggi Gianfranco. (1971) The Place of Religion in Durkheim’s Theory of institutions; In: European Journal of Sociology. 12(2), 229-260.  https://doi:10.1017/S0003975600002319
Spiro, Melford. (1966) Religion: Problems of Definition and Explanation; In: Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion, Michael Banton (ed.) London: Tavistock.
Tocqueville, Alexis de. (2012) Democracy in America. (Tow Vol.) Eduardo nolla (ed.) T. Schlaeifer (Trans.) Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
Turner, Bryan S. (2005) Talcott Parsons’s Sociology of Religion and the Expressive Revolution: The Problem of Western Individualism; In: Journal of Classical Sociology, 5(6), 303-318. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468795X05053487
Vanderstraeten, Raf. (2012) Talcott Parsons and the enigma of secularization; In: European Journal of Social Theory; 16(1), 69-84.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1368431011422921
Vanderstraeten, Raf. (2015) Inclusion Ideals and Inclusion Promlems: Parsons and Luhmann on
Religion and Secularization; Acta Sociologica, 58(2), 173-185.    https://doi.org/10.1177/0001699314562807
Weber, Max. (1958) The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism; Trans. T. Parsons. New York: Scribner.
Weber, Max. (1922 org.1978) Economy & Society. Edited by G. Roth & C. Wittich. Berkeley: university of California press.
Sociological Cultural Studies
Volume 17, Issue 3 - Serial Number 61
Autumn 2026
Autumn 2026
Pages 271-305

  • Receive Date 30 January 2026
  • Revise Date 26 March 2026
  • Accept Date 31 March 2026
  • Publish Date 22 November 2026