Introduction: Social Control
Social control entails generally to both the political and societal mechanisms/ processes present, which aid in the regulation of group and individual behavior. This is often in an attempt at gaining both compliance and conformity to the prevailing rules, norms and regulations set, in a given jurisprudence, social grouping or society. In the field of sociology, this is categorized into two core avenues: informal and formal means of social control. The former, pertains to the internalization of various values and norms, through various forms of socio-cultural and religious interactions. The latter, entails the presence of external sanctions, enforceable through policies, rules, standards and regulations, by the existing form of government. This is towards preventing the establishment of anarchy, or anomie within society. This form of social control, is viewed by a segment of theorists i.e. Emile Durkheim, as being equal to human social regulation (Malinowski, 1948). So as to better understand social control, there is a need to delve into the nature of human civilization and interaction.
Human social interaction and coexistence is exemplified through various forms of ritualized behaviors, often in the form of routines (Kant, 2001). With the aspect of the supernatural engaging the presence of chance, ritualized behavior and routines are performed in various contexts, with the aim of altering the resulting occurrences. This may be partly explained by the fact that routines are usually comforting, bringing a sense of order and cohesion in an environment offering little, if any control. Rituals on the other hand, grow out of the continued presence of desired results, in a given activity, where the types of activities/ acts performed are portrayed as being core to the eventual desired outcomes. This is attributed to the relational aspect of human success, with a set or system of activities, behavior and actions (Vyse, 1997). As Gmelch (2011) portrays, in his article – Baseball Magic – there exists the prevailing inert nature of human beings, towards practicing a system of rituals, cultural socialization and behavior.
Religion: Role and Influence on Human Society
This holds true, the time-frame in history notwithstanding, as is shown through the comparison of Dennis Grossini’s ritualized behavior when playing baseball, to that of men in a typical Trobriand Islander’s daily life. Through magic, which is symbolized by the performance of ritual ceremonies and the possession of variants of fetishes/ good-luck charms, society is controlled. This helps people assume some sense of control over the supernatural. This is in terms of behavioral conduct and cultural assumptions, which provide society with a way of life and cultural socialization. It is in the field of baseball, arguably America’s national pass-time, where its professional players portray behavioral traits similar to the aforementioned Trobriand Islanders. As such, their livelihoods’ dependence on their overall performance provides them with the reason to ritualize their play, hoping to alter or influence the aspect of chance. To be noted is that chance is an integral aspect of baseball, thus the practice of various forms of ritualized behavior (Barzilai, 2007).
Three essential activities encompass the game of baseball: fielding, hitting and pitching. In the latter two, chance can and does play an instrumental role, providing for the various legendary hits and pitches. By ritualizing their daily routines, baseball players do in some manner; portray similar behavioral characteristics to the islanders, the level of civilization and socialization notwithstanding. This provides a basic concept of how religion establishes and maintains some sense of social control. From the tribal and feudal historical background of human society, to the era of empires and kingdoms, man has throughout, maintained a sense of social attachment. Ross (2009) portends that through advancing and developing social existence, humanity has come to embrace various forms of moral norms and cultural interaction as a sign of identity. From the period of forming organized sociology, social control has been at the center of human basic interaction. Initial reference was to society’s ability to self-regulate, with recent historical definition entailing modernized meaning.
As Shouler (2010) alludes, various religions possess symbols, narratives and sacred historical basis, which explain amongst others, the meaning and origin of life and the universe, as humanity knows it. It is from these beliefs about human nature and the universe that people derive their preferred way of life/ socialization, in addition to religious laws, ethics and morality/ cultural norms. As an avenue of social control, religion influences all segments of society, through possession of organized clergy, social codes of behavior, holy places of worship and scriptures amongst others (Shouler, 2010). This thereby necessitates its inclusion as an avenue of social control where rituals, initiations, meditation, music, prayer, dance, art, public service, matrimonial services, sermons, festivals and dance provide avenues of asserting control/ regulation. Furtherance is the presence of deity (gods or goddesses) veneration, where human spiritual and physical identity is rooted. It is the supernatural nature of these beliefs, which provides reference to the prevailing human understanding of magic.
Social Control, Order and Interaction
This is in turn, the reason why variants of mythologies exist: to providing a basis for early human social interaction (Immanuel, 2001). Due to the aspect of religion being ‘eminently social’, as Durkheim portrays, it is different from private belief systems, which may be held by a few individuals and not encompassing wholesome social representation (Durkheim, 1915). For many years, different sociologists have come to identify various agents of social control. Some of these agents include family, peer groupings, political movements, ideological inclinations, religious orientation and the mass media. Strange behavior, which may appear to be peculiar to an outsider, is common amongst all forms of religion, with pious adherents physically differentiating themselves from others, with regard to religious affiliations. In addition to distinct dress codes, codes of behavior and ways of socialization, various religions also entail the aspect of alteration, ritualized through various forms of actions and acts.
Ritual behavior, as portended by archaeologists, has been an aspect of humanity throughout the ages, with each and every culture practicing some form of religion (Ross, 2009). This holds true even in case scenarios where existing governments have at one time or the other, attempted to eliminate or minimize spiritual/ religious practice, albeit covertly. Even with the advent of the scientific and technological revolution, providing a sense of human rationalism, as based on empirical research-based evidence, religion still continues to flourish (Ellwood, 1981 ). This is influenced by man’s belief in a supernatural entity and the afterlife, as well as in heaven and hell, which encompass the two places human beings are destined to reach. As influenced by their behaviors while on earth, the path of either of the two is assured, when they enter the afterlife. Behavioral ecologists are of the assumption that natural selection influences human beings to optimize the rate at which individuals accrue various resources under the prevailing circumstances (Ellwood, 1981).
As provided through the Optimal Foraging Theory, behavioral responses, under a given environmental constraints, influences human socialization and interaction (Freed and Freed, 1990). The belief in the value of rituals, as well as in the tenets of a given religious faith, provides the reason behind various ceremonies held/ observed. Natural behavior, as Moghan and Just (2000) observe, has in some way, favored the existence of such behavior, and within the human species, because of the variability of strange religious practices and rituals, as well as the inherent costs accrued when engaging in the same. Ritualized behaviors do solve adaptive problems, such as lack of loyalty, adherence and commitment to the group. These do evolve out of the dilemma faced by human beings, when engaging in the promotion of social cooperation. Consequently, the core adaptive benefit of religion is towards facilitating human cooperation and co-existence, especially with regard to various critical activities pertinent to man’s evolutionary history and path. While enhanced social interaction and cohesion provides for better chances of human survival, this is often difficult to achieve, let alone coordinate (Monaghan and Just, 2000).
Cooperation does require various forms of social mechanisms, which are crucial in preventing individuals from taking advantage of others. Religion provides an avenue through which this may be achieved, with religious rituals serving as a means of communication. In the overall sense, religion and inherently religious activities do offer insight into an individual’s or group of people’s commitment to their affiliated group and members within. Through ritualized behaviors, the individual portrays his commitment and allegiance to the given social grouping, often in mind, body and spirit (Rappaport, 1994). This in essence, provides a case scenario of social control, where members of a given entity will act, cooperate and engage in specific codes of behavior, cultural undertakings and religious ideals and acts. These are usually symbolic of their given inclination and consideration of other human beings, especially as influenced by their surrounding social contexts. Religion hence does foster and promote cooperation, with the aspect of trust lying at the very heart of the social grouping (Jones, 2004).
Religion and Society: Interdependence
An increase in the constraints subjected on various religions’ membership, results in strict adherence to the same principles, thus portending to the longevity of some forms of religion. Accordingly, the Costly Signaling Theory of ritual provides an example of how both requirements and constraints imposed on members, signal their commitment to the group’s overall wellbeing (Janowitz, 1975.). This necessitates the presence of some form of social control, though cohesion and cooperation. In turn, the benefits of such association are accessible to the members, with these being inclusive of amongst others, cumulative wealth, power, safety and ideological backing amongst others. This is unlike the case with secular groupings, even in the presence of various costly requirements (Lindbeck, 1984). Through the aforementioned, one is able to understand the most costly aspect of a given religion, through its adherents’ expected behavioral traits, ritual obligations.
It also serves as an effective deterrent, to any one, or group of individuals who do not believe in a particular religion’s teachings. Thus, non-believers do not have any incentive to remain in a given religious grouping, due to the costly nature of maintaining membership. Adherents are those individuals trusted enough, to sincerely believe in their respective religious communities’ doctrines and principles (Vergote, 1997). In the quest for achieving various communal pursuits, the increased levels of commitment and trust, amongst members of a given religious inclination, there is need for minimal engagement/ initiation of costly mechanisms of monitoring. Thus, the adaptive benefit of a given ritualized behavior is in its core ability of both promoting and maintaining social cooperation, thereby enhancing greater social control. A fundamental prediction of the aforementioned ‘costly signaling theory of ritual’ would be the fact that the groups which impose the greatest of demands on their members do in turn elicit the highest levels of commitment and devotion (Janowitz, 1975).
It is only through such enhanced levels of cohesion, that groups can be able to achieve their collective goals, missions and aims. To be noted is the fact that the most demanding of groups/ affiliations, often do have the most members, in terms of committed adherents. With greater commitment, comes enhanced cooperation, thus the very able aspect of religion offering an optimal avenue of social control (Janowitz, 1975). A basis for religion’s hold on human society may be explained by way of the fact that it is easier to remember the prevailing counterintuitive character of supernatural concepts, than that of mundane ideals. However, there is need to understand that it is the prevailing nature of such enhanced cooperation and adherence, which often is the root cause of various conflicts (Avalos, 2005). Competition is often in the form of group competitiveness and defense against others within the existing contexts.
Taboos on the other hand i.e. disrespect to elders, immoral and/ or unnatural acts, murders and blasphemy amongst others, exist with the main aim of imposing restrictions on the kind of human activities to be engaged in. These provide measures against committing various acts which would go against the grain of society, in terms of behavioral characteristics and social portrayal (Vergote, 1997). Through their belief in the sanctity of taboos, adherents strive towards making sure that they observe various sets of standards and regulations provided. This in turn avails an avenue through which the pertinent society is controlled/ regulated, in terms of behavioral conduct, code of dressing and language, in addition to overall social conduct (Ellwood, 1981).
In conclusion would be to say that religion does establish and maintain social control through specific avenues. However, in some contexts, it is this same adherence, which provides for current forms of violence, especially those based or rooted in religious ideals. From the discussion above, though adherence to certain levels does encourage and foster violence, there is also the aspect where through adherence to a given set of regulations and standards, populations are able to live in co-existence (Barzilai, 2007). Man continues to engage in various actions, scientifically deemed incoherent; however, this adherence provides parameters for social control and order.
References
Avalos, Hector. 2005. Fighting Words: The Origins of Religious Violence. Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books.
Awolalu, J. O. 1976. What is African Traditional Religion? Studies in Comparative Religion. 10(2), 143-54.
Barzilai, Gad. 2007. Law and Religion. Ashgate: The International Library of Essays in Law and Society.
Durkheim, Emile. 1915. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Ellwood, Charles A. 1981. Religion and Social Control. The Scientific Monthly. 7: 176-183.
Fitzgerald, Timothy. 2000. The Ideology of Religious Studies. New York: Oxford University Press.
Freed, S. and Freed, R. 1990. Taraka Ghost. Natural History. 99(10): 84-91.
Geetz, Clifford. 1993. ‘Religion as a Cultural System.’ In The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays, pp. 87-125 (author) Fontana Press.
Gmelch, George. 2011. ‘Baseball magic'. In E. Angeloni. Annual Editions: Anthropology, Vol. 12/13, (35th Ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.
Herbert, Steve and Katherine Beckett. 2009. Zoning out disorder: Assessing contemporary practices of urban social control. Studies in Law, Politics, and Society. 47: 1-25.
Iannaccone, Louis. (1992). Sacrifice and Stigma: Reducing free-riding in cults, communes and other collectives. Journal of Political Economy. 100: 271-291.
Janowitz, Morris. 1975. Sociological Theory and Social Control. American Journal of Sociology (The University of Chicago Press Article). 81(1): 82–108.
Jones, James W. 2004. Religion, Health, and the Psychology of Religion: How the Research on Religion and Health Helps Us Understand Religion. Journal of Religion and Health. 43 (4): 317–328.
Kant, Immanuel. 2001. Religion and Rational Theology. Cambridge University Press.
Lindbeck, George A. 1984. Nature of Doctrine. Louisville: John Knox/ Westminster Press.
Malinowski, Bronislaw. 1948. Magic, Science and Religion, and Other Essays. Glencoe, IL.
Masuzawa Tomoko. 2007. The Invention of World Religions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007.
Monaghan, John and Just, Peter. 2000. Social & Cultural Anthropology. New York: Oxford University Press.
Moyers, Bill. 1991. The Power of Myth, (Ed.). New York: Anchor Books.
Ramsay, Micheal. 1964. Abp. Beyond Religion? Cincinnati, Ohio: Forward Movement Publications.
Rappaport, Ramsey. 1994. Ritual and Religion in the Making of humanity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ronald C. Wimberley and James A. Christenson. Civil Religion, Church and State. The Sociological Quarterly. 21(1): 35-40.
Ross, Edward. A. 2009. Social Control: Control and Survey of the Foundations of Order (Ed.). Piscataway, NJ: Transcation Publishers.
Shouler, Kenneth. 2010. The Everything World’s Religions Book: Explore the Beliefs, Traditions and Cultures of Ancient and Modern Religion. NY, New York: Wiley Publishers.
Sosis, Richard and Alcorta, Collins. 2003. Signaling, Solidarity and the Sacred: The Evolution of Religious Behavior. Evolutionary Anthropology. 12: 264-274.
Sosis, Richard. 2004. The Adaptive Value of Religious Ritual: Rituals promote group cohesion by requiring members to engage in behavior that is too costly to fake. American Scientist. 92: 166-172
Stark, Rodney and Bainbridge, William S. 1997. Religion, Deviance and Social Control. New York: Routledge.
Vergote, Antoine. 1997. Religion, Belief and Unbelief. A Psychological Study. Leuven University Press.
Vyse, Stevenson. 1997. The Psychology of Superstition. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Zahavi, Alex and Andrew Zahavi. 1997. The Handicap Principle. New York: Oxford University Press.
