Over a century ago, French sociologist Emile Durkheim undertook research on why individuals in cities tend to commit suicide more frequently than those who liked in closely knit rural societies. The answer was Anomie– the sense of dispossession. He said anomie exists in society:
….where the traditional sources of societal regulation — religion, government, and occupational groups — have all failed to exercise moral constraints on an increasingly unregulated capitalist economy.Religion, which once consoled the poor and at least partially restricted the material ambitions of the rich, has simply lost most of its power. Government, which once restrained and subordinated economic functions, is now their servant, thus, the orthodox economist would reduce government to a guarantor of individual contracts, while the extreme socialist would make it the “collective bookkeeper” — and neither would grant it the power to subordinate other social agencies and unite them toward one common aim. Even occupational groups, which once regulated salaries, fixed the price of products and production, and indirectly fixed the average level of income on which needs were based, has been made impotent by the growth of industry and the indefinite expansion of the market.
Basically a society where all the familiar have disappeared leaving the individual with no crutches or anchor to tether their lives, is one where all kinds of moral deviance – and suicide is an extreme form of moral deviance, remember this was 19th century Europe, very Christian, and suicide was a mortal sin, occur because state, religion and other social organisations no longer hold any influence or sway on the citizen.
This was, for a long time the dominant hypothesis as far as society is concerned. Which is why every so often we have people spouting the need for “family values”, “religious values” “moral straight and narrow” and so on. I tend to buy some of this argument. Though I believe that an overdose of family, religion, values are just as liable to send someone to slit their wrists, or go ballistic, as the feeling of being completely rootless. I also believe that an overdose of religiousity can lead people to go wrong. For example, not teaching sex education in school because it is against your religion/culture can lead to experimentation that can have fairly serious consequeces for children/teenagers , just as having no rules can lead to them going astray.
So, it was with amusement that I read an article in Murdoch’s Times (of London) about how “Societies worse off ‘when they have God on their side’
Quoting from a paper published in the Journal of Religion and Society, based on research conducted in the USA, the paper says:
In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion in the prosperous democracies.
The reason i found the report amusing, is because Murdoch’s other media vehicle’s – Fox – broadcasts probably encourages a great deal of false religiousity amongst people. If a people can have a God given right to invade another country, then they probably have the God given right to rob banks with God given guns, bonk all over the place without birth control (birth control is a sin – bonking is a divine right) , shoot their veins (or is it arteries) up with God given drugs and more:)
For any society or people who think that they have a ‘God Given Right’ to do as they please the above conclusion would probably be valid. The way Taliban behaved in Afghanistan is probably a case in point – they believed that they had the God given right to do what they wanted. Where the basic moral codes of society are violated – where killing is approved in the name of God, where subjugation of a gender (usually women) is justified in the name of God, where discrimination is encouraged in the name of God – sooner or later, unless you change, you are going to see a breakdown in society. My God loves me therefore I can get away with murder, discrimination, bombing, – seems to be the stance of fundamentalists everywhere. And if my God gives me a bigger gun than your god, then i can get away with more murder, bombing etal than you.
And at the other end is this entire thing of sexual morality, and women’s rights. Fundamentalists expect ‘chastity’ of everyone except themselves. And of course, they expect women to take the back seat on almost everything from their status in society to their role in the workplace. Just look at countries like Saudi Arabia to know what I mean. Look at the US and this entire idiocy on abortion. And, when you have this kind of restrictions, people are going to want to break free. Value education and Moral Brainwashing are two very different things. The former you imbibe, the latter you want to break. I have cousins with strict parents (everything is a sin school of parenting) who went so terribly astray, and i have cousins with ‘liberal’ parenting – who have turned out so well – that it teaches you that the easiest way to get someone to do something is to ban it.
There is a difference between faith and religiousity. And it is probably that difference that shows up in societal deviance.
god morality culture – related concepts – and all leading to the ostrich mentality. I too read the article about societies which are have god on their minds being worse off… makes sense – and if nothing works there is always confession and repentence – I dont mean just in christian societies but all – it is like people who “sin” most who donate most at Tirupati!
The Never-Ending Debate!
Wouldn’t it be great is someone could come up with a cure for stupidity. With just one treatment we could eliminate 99.9% of the world’s problems.
A social “scientist†named Gregory Paul has published a “study†in the “Journal of Religion and Society†which purports to show that there is a correlation between religiosity and social ills. Just what the world needed: more stupidity to further muddy up the on-going debate between legitimate scientists and religious fanatics.
First, no one should be allowed to use the word “scientist†in their title unless they have a firm understanding of mathematics and are capable of interpreting the statistics they generate. This effectively eliminates all sociologists and psychologists. These pretenders obviously have not mastered even basic math and have no understanding of the scientific method. Their jumping into the debate with faulty interpretation of questionable statistics only adds confusion. The religious fanatics will capitalize on this “study†by a “scientist†to further discredit their opponents.
Second, the debate has enough stupid players already. On the one hand we have fools who ignore all evidence that disagrees with their preconceived ideas, no matter how convincing it may be. On the other hand, we have arrogant scientists who should know better than to argue with these close-minded dimwits.
GP states that in the US, “the majority believes in a creator rather than the theory of evolution.†How did he determine this? Did he rely on a survey? Does he not realize that most Americans are conformist, who would claim to believe in a creator simply because they think that is the popular thing to do. He certainly didn’t monitor church attendance because most people don’t attend regularly. Perhaps he just listened to our very vocal preachers and politicians: a couple of groups who wouldn’t know the truth if it hit them in the face.
A more plausible explanation for the high rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide in the US is the aforementioned tendency of Americans to conform to what is currently popular. People, especially teens, are heavily influenced by movies and television, and one need only view some of the offensive offerings of the media to see why we have high STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion, sexual promiscuity and suicide. The growth of drug activity and gangs in our cities explains homicide, and juvenile and early adult mortality. Suicide is a byproduct of the increasing stress of urban life. All of this is the result of our compulsion to conform.
On the other hand, perhaps someone already has come up with a cure for stupidity: nuclear war. We may end the debate after all.
Hi Charu,
i think that there will be a link between social hypocrisy and societal brekdown. look at TN and this entire shit that is happening – moral policing. I asked my students in two different colleges about Valentines’ day. THe bulk of them replied that they think that it so unkool:) but they follow it because the moral police says no.
It’s like alice in wonderland – the best way to make someone do something is to say “don’t do it”. If you look at the success of curbing drug addiction in Holland – where many ‘soft drugs’ are legal – and let’s say the US or UK – where they are not – you will see a marked difference.
If you attacked abortion on health grounds as opposed to ‘sin’ grounds – it probably would be more effective.
Hi Sand pebble
Durkheim, who i have quoted at the begining of this quote, is considered the father of modern sociology. And his work Suicide is replete with a great deal of data gathering and data analysis. And his interpretation of data was fairly spot on. So, i am not sure whether it is about sociologists or psychology. or whether it is about interpreting data into something sensible.
i find the study kind of silly as well. for a multitude of reasons. primarily because i find its cause and effect correlation slightly wonky. i find its cause and effect causality also wonky. so here is a work by an ‘academic’ whose correlation and causality are both screwed:) So there isn’t much left.
And i find it quite amazing that they have held neither parents, nor schools, nor the state – 3 institutions with which youngsters interact the most – responsible for breakdown in society. Rather, it is the role of the “church”. As far as media is concerned i am slightly ambivalent about the ‘media effects’ theory. coz most criminals are shown as dead or caught. most heros/heroines are in steady long term relationships. most people who have abortions are shown as losers. most who consume drugs are shown the same. So i am not sure that they are conforming to media images. I am fairly sure that there is breakdown of society for two reasons:
a) there are those areas where there is little or no parental control
b) there are those areas where increasing fundamentalism is causing parents to exert too much control.
and both are contributing to deviancy.