Conflating the views of Weber and Durkheim to study the religious beliefs that form the social order

Introduction and Objectives: The views of Weber and Durkheim have a deep and lasting influence on the sociology of religion. Despite this issue, there are significant differences between the theoretical frameworks and also their method components, and practically, the mentioned theories usually seem to be irreconcilable. On the other hand, the capacities and limitations of the views of these two prominent thinkers are such that they alone are not able to explain many issues of the sociology of religion. Based on this, the upcoming article tries to use the conflating of Weber's and Durkheim's views in order to study the religious beliefs that form the social order.
Method: In this article, the library method has been used, and while referring to the original works of Weber and Durkheim, we have tried to simultaneously pay attention to the works of older and mostly American commentators, as well as the views of newer and mostly European authors. It seems that the image created by writers such as Hans H. Gerth, C. Wright Mills, or Talcott Parsons with the authors of the book "Weber; "Cambridge Guide" or Raymond Boudon show significant differences.
Results: In the first step of this research, the question of how to link the views of Weber and Durkheim has been addressed. Passing from monolinear evolutionism in the study of various religions, alleviation of tension-causing points in the path of conflating two approaches with the mediation of psychological theories, and finally, the rethinking around traditional and emotional actions in Weber's thought, are the most important indicators to answer the aforementioned question. The second step is also related to the description of the analytical achievements of linking the views of Weber and Durkheim. The possibility of rational study of beliefs and behaviors without reference to utilitarianism and consequentialism, creating balance in the study of religion as a source of change and stability of societies, establishing a balance between the ideas of creating rituals and character development in the continuation of religions, and also the development of religious ethics is constituted the most important findings of this section.
Discussion and Conclusions: Given what has been said about how Weber's and Durkheim's views were linked and also the analytical results of such a link, Weber's insights and methods are: 1- Charisma and his ideas are the most important sources of the emergence of religion. 2- The possibility of preserving, transferring, diverting, etc. is conceivable charismatic power. 3- If the ideas of charisma do not become the main element that constitutes the lifestyle of the society, one cannot speak of the emergence of a new religion. 4- One of the main ways of preserving, transferring, or diverting charismatic ideas is related to people who play a role in and benefit from the post-charisma economic-political processes. 5- At the moment of the emergence of charisma, rationality has a decisive position in the spread of charismatic ideas; but gradually, pure and innovative value rationality turns into a kind of value rationality, sometimes traditional or imitative. 6- Value-based rationality that motivates rational-value action becomes the origin of the delineation of belief-value ethics. 7- In the absence of charisma and perhaps in conflict situations, the possibility of creating heroic ethics and the emergence of personality - as someone who builds the entirety of his life on the basis of certain beliefs and in special moments brings these values ​​to perfection - is provided. 8- Traditional and emotional actions are actions based on customs, habits, and imitations that, although they have lower levels of rationality, can be studied. 9- The evolution of religions takes place on the kind of complex evolutionism in value-based rationality, but this does not negate the possible influence of stakeholders and economic and political conditions.
Durkheim's restorative insights also include: 1- The root of individual and collective obligations (social order) is in a force beyond individual humans (the sacred). 2- In periods of stability that have come a long way since the emergence of religious beliefs, emotions, and feelings play an important role in preserving religion and are reinforced and reproduced through collective religious symbols and rituals. 3- If symbols and rituals are subjected to arbitrary interpretations and interpretations, the possibility of new sects forming increases, and perhaps heresy in the principles of religion can lead to the questioning of the basis of religious beliefs. 4- Every religion has special mechanisms for internal and external control (preservation) of its beliefs and rituals, and it cannot be indifferent to the weakening and denial of its opinions and rituals. 5- There are always forms of creating individual religion, heresy (heretics), and personal legislation (heresy) that are not unrelated to collective religion. 6- People's demand from the magician is more concerned with satisfying personal needs and desires than within the framework of the conventional outcomes of collective religion. Accordingly, it can be said that if Weber's insight and methodological approach, through the introduction of the concepts of rationality, charisma, and authority, has an acceptable capacity for understanding the dynamics of religion, Durkheim's perspective, through the introduction of the concepts of emotions, rituals, and coercion, has a high capacity for studying the statics of religion.