To understand Weber’s sociology of religion, we must first understand what religion is; this is something that Weber never explains. This article is a preparatory work for studying Weber’s sociology of religion. The following is a conjecture on what religion is.
It is difficult to understand what religion is because it is often regarded as, for example, an object, a concept, a set of rituals, or a set of mythological wonders. These definitions might be somewhat reasonable, but religious adherents typically chafe at their self-application, finding them to be inaccurate or misleading.
If a person cannot understand their life based on such definitions, how can they be expected to understand religion in this way? This simple but self-evident truth is the main obstacle to understanding religion. If what religion is defined as does not accord with my perception of what religion is to me, this tension is alienating.
Weber argues that the character of an ethically colored maxim for the conduct of life is linked to the concept of the “spirit of capitalism,” which is applied herein. The concept of capitalism is not based on an isolated individual; rather, it is a mode of intuition perceived by human groups. There is no “spirit” of God here, only the “intention” of secular society.
Religion is not static. The word religion is derived from the Latin religare, meaning rebinding constraints. Religion is defined as a system of faith, worship, loyalty, or devotion to one principle. The thoughts, beliefs, and power systems that bind believers together are all constitutive elements of religion. The following question must be asked: what is the purpose of this rebinding? The author approaches the topic open to novel realizations.