Religion or religious beliefs as a social actor

Sociology deals with social actors, that is, with the interactions of people with one another and with the social events and phenomena they bring about as a result of these interactions. A behavior that a person performs on their own, that concerns only themselves and remains limited to their own individuality, is generally not characterized as social behavior. For that behavior to be considered social, it is deemed necessary that it be directed at the behavior of another and be in interaction with other people. Although there are debates on this subject, we can roughly see the boundaries of sociological behavior within the framework of this principle. In that case, one may ask to what extent a person praying on their own, in a manner that concerns no one, is a social act. For this behavior, which remains entirely within individual limits, to become a subject of sociology, either that prayer must reveal a common belief shared with others, or it must point to the socialization that the act of prayer creates among the people it brings together. In both cases, the common understanding operating among people also involves a process of building a world. The common understanding itself, that the act of prayer has a meaning and that one can have an effect on the world through this act, is having an effect on the world. A prayer performed collectively has a special effect on the perception and construction of the world.

Is a social action only a human being who is seen physically performing the action, or can it be assumed that sacred things, as a realm constructed by human beings, also contribute to this action? This question can in fact be asked further, about God as well. If, for a social action as a subject of sociology, another human action to which the actor must be directed is required, can the relationship a human being establishes with God not be regarded as a social action? Moreover, can God, as a matter of belief whose effect a person believes in and to which they respond by way of that effect, be regarded as a social actor in the sociological sense? For a person who believes in Allah, this question is undoubtedly meaningless, even wrong. Allah, of course, determines everything and is the absolute agent of everything. But this is not what we are talking about here; what we are talking about is the action of Allah as something to be identified in a sociological study. From a Marxist perspective, Allah, or religious belief and conception in general, has an effect on human action, but this effect is in any case a superstructural effect as a derivative of the economic relations of production. That is, the human being comes under the influence of the god they themselves have created. That something produced by human beings (labor or thought) reaches a point where it affects human beings presents another example of alienation.

The truth is that, in the sociological sense, different conceptions of God have different effects on people's lives. Different religious beliefs can give rise to different modes of action. This shows the effect of religious belief on human life. In the end, by adopting a religious belief, people may themselves be making an active choice. But God, who is not physically present around us yet whose existence is shaped by the belief people adopt, influences people precisely in accordance with the form in which He is adopted. For example, among people who think that God creates everything that happens in the world without giving the human being any power of choice, a kind of fatalistic, conservative and right-wing mode of behavior prevails. Because, thinking that they will have no effect on what happens anyway, and believing that everything that happens is a decree of God, they consider it right not to object to anything. Yet from those who think that Allah has given human beings the power of choice, will hold them responsible for everything they do, and will punish those who fail to fulfill this responsibility, a more active participation in social life can be expected. For that reason, the level of development of some societies can be tied directly to their conceptions of God or religion.

Thus, although God or religion is ultimately a matter that is in the human mind or heart, it exerts an effect as an actor on human behavior, at least by this route. Establishing relations between certain religious beliefs and certain social developments or failures of development has therefore been one of the avenues resorted to since the birth of sociology. In the light of this association, for example, theses can be developed today to the effect that Turkey's distinctive understanding of Islam makes it more advantaged relative to other countries in the Islamic world. Countless examples can be found of a certain understanding or practice of religion leading to different social developments. It is well known that Max Weber drew attention to the role of Protestantism, and Werner Sombart to the role of Judaism, in the development of capitalism. Likewise, explanations have also been offered that attribute the backwardness of the Islamic world to certain features of Islam. However, these explanations provoked significant reactions among the Muslim thinkers of the late 19th and 20th centuries. According to these thinkers, the backwardness of the Islamic world stemmed not from adhering to Islam but from drifting away from Islam.

In sum, when investigating the social effect of religion, can we regard it as a sociological actor? A sociological actor is a being that has a certain social existence and reality and that, through the action it performs, carries meaning-making and intention. Undoubtedly, religion as a pattern of behavior does not possess the quality of being such an actor. For someone who believes in Allah, He is the absolute actor; He is already doing everything. But although sociology has no problem with this belief, it is not conducted by proceeding from this belief. Because what sociology is interested in is what kind of effect this belief gives rise to. That religion fulfills very powerful functions in different societies has been generally accepted in sociological circles, at least since the relationship Max Weber found between the Protestant Ethic and the spirit of capitalism.