Functionalism emphasises the social nature of religion and the positive functions it performs.
Durkheim's theory may apply better to small-scale societies with a single religion. It's harder to apply it to large-scale societies where two or more religious communities may be in conflict. His theory may explain social integration within communities but doesn't explain conflict between them.
Postmodernists- Mestrovic- Durkheim's ideas cannot be applied to contemporary society because of increasing diversity fragmenting the collective conscience so there's no longer a single shared value system for religion to reinforce.
The evidence on totemism is unsound- Worsley- there's no sharp division between the sacred and the profane, and that different clans share the same totems. Even if Durkheim's right about totenism, it doesn't prove that he has discovered the essence of all other religion. It neglects negative aspects such as religion as a source of oppression of the poor or women.
It ignores religion as source of division and conflict, especially in complex modern societies where there's more than one religion. Where there's religious pluralism it's hard to see how it can unite people and promote integration.
The idea of civil religion overcomes this problem by arguing that societies may still have an overarching belief system shared by all but is it really a religion?

	Created by vesara over 10 years ago

A-Level Sociology -Religion Slide Set on A2 Sociology- Religion- Topic1- Theories of religion, created by vesara on 03/05/2016.