Las formas elementales de la vida religiosa
- Idioma:
- inglés
- Traducción:
- J. W. Swain
- Estado:
- Obra completa
- Autoría:
- Escrita por el autor
- Estado del texto:
- Texto limpio
- Extensión:
- ~270.000 palabras · 1285 pasajes
Cita esta obra
- APAÉmile Durkheim. (n.d.). Las formas elementales de la vida religiosa. SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/es/works/emile-durkheim/the-elementary-forms-of-the-religious-life
- MLAÉmile Durkheim. "Las formas elementales de la vida religiosa." SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/es/works/emile-durkheim/the-elementary-forms-of-the-religious-life.
- ChicagoÉmile Durkheim. Las formas elementales de la vida religiosa. SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/es/works/emile-durkheim/the-elementary-forms-of-the-religious-life.
De qué trata
El libro donde Durkheim busca la forma más simple de religión para entenderlas todas, y donde concluye que lo que una sociedad adora, sin saberlo, es ella misma.
Contexto e historia
Publicado en 1912. Toma como caso elemental el totemismo de los pueblos aborígenes australianos, y aquí hace falta una precisión honesta: Durkheim no estuvo nunca allí. Trabaja sobre etnografías ajenas, y ese material ha sido muy cuestionado después, tanto por su calidad como por el supuesto de que aquellas sociedades fueran «elementales». El argumento sociológico —lo sagrado como fuerza colectiva, el ritual como lo que la mantiene viva— se ha sostenido mucho mejor que el material sobre el que se construyó.
Contexto editorial, no una fuente citable: a diferencia de los pasajes de la obra, estos datos no se pueden comprobar contra el corpus.
SUBJECT OF OUR STUDY: RELIGIOUS SOCIOLOGY AND THE THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE In this book we propose to study the most primitive and simple religion which is actually known, to make an analysis of it, and to attempt an explanation of it. A religious system may be said to be the most primitive which we can observe when it fulfils the two following conditions: in the first place, when it is found in a society whose organization is surpassed by no others in simplicity;[1] and secondly, when it is possible to explain it without making use of any element borrowed from a previous religion. We shall set ourselves to describe the organization of this system with all the exactness and fidelity that an ethnographer or an historian could give it. But our task will not be limited to that: sociology raises other problems than history or ethnography. It does not seek to know the passed forms of civilization with the sole end of knowing them and reconstructing them. But rather, like every positive science, it has as its object the explanation of some actual reality which is near to us, and which consequently is capable of affecting our ideas and our acts: this reality is man, and more precisely, the man of to-day, for there is nothing which we are more interested in knowing. Then we are not going to study a very archaic religion simply for the pleasure of telling its peculiarities and its singularities. If we have taken it as the subject of our research, it is because it has seemed to us better adapted than any other to lead to an understanding of the religious nature of man, that is to say, to show us an essential and permanent aspect of humanity.