Religion and its Dual Nature

When things have both a positive and a negative side, it makes it easier to buy into because it is easier to see what is right and what is wrong. Religion buys into this phenomena too. Durkheim points this out in his work, "The Elementary forms of Religious Life". He discusses how religions dictate what is positive (sacred) and what is negative (profane) and how religions use these guidelines as a way to instruct the "user" on how to live their life. 

The idea that religion can guide one's life is not new, Durkheim discusses that even in primitive societies, life sometimes centered around religion. One notion that seems to have come about in modern religion is the idea of God. Durkheim brings up an interesting point when explaining how people have tried to define religion, "Another idea by which many have tried to define religion is that of divinity...". When most think of anything relating to religion, they think of God, or some kind of higher power. Durkheim illustrates that this is not always needed for a religion to exist, this ties into the importance of the two separate spheres that exist in religions, the sacred and the profane. Where things stand on either side of the spectrum aid people in making the right decisions for their lives. Even for religions without a God, there is still heavy importance on what is good and what is bad. Something, whether it be God, spirits, or some other indicator, dictate what is what and people live their lives based off that. 

Another interesting topic that Durkheim brings up is the idea that God(s) are as dependent on humans as humans are dependent on him/them. He states "...the dependence is mutual. The gods also need man; without offering and sacrifices, they would die". It seems like Durkheim is trying to say that if people did not believe, would God(s) still exist? As much as humans rely on God for guidance and help throughout their lives, their belief in him is what keeps the cycle going. 

The classification of things as either sacred or profane made me wonder who came up with these rules? Who is in charge of deeming something one or the other? Some things are obviously one or the other, but for things that exist in the gray area, it takes a lot of faith to believe in the classification given by religion. Durkheim's comments on the idea that God is just as dependent on humans as they are on him really intrigued me. I had never though of it that way before. It makes sense though that people have to be engaged for something to continue, if everyone stopped believing, than it would not exist anymore. Durkheim's piece really got to me, after reading it, I looked at things in a different way.