Division of Labor

Even though his views of a communistic utopia are strongly opposed in America, we can use the problems he pointed out to improve capitalism. Marx thought people wanted to feel important through their work, and he feared capitalism would ruin this desire. In large firms and factories, the contribution of individuals would seem minute, leading to alienation (Wolff). Marx also concluded that capitalism made humans expendable. He believed people would be seen as another form of production that could easily be replaced when costs rise or new technology takes their place. This could be solved by a communist world where everyone feels valued. This "equal ness" would also prevent capitalists from gaining enormous profits, which came at the expense of the talent and hard work of the labor force. He also believed capitalism was unstable and was bound to have many crises throughout its reign due to an accumulation of an abundance of resources. One rather remarkable belief of Marx was how unemployment was good because it meant the labor force was so productive that people did not need to work. He thought unemployment should be looked at as freedom. For example, Marx opposed the female work opportunity movement by asking why women want to join in the agony that is work. Overall, Marx thought capitalism would teach us to be anxious, competitive, conformist, and politically complacent

The division of labor is a complex phenomenon that is characterized by varying aspects of an individual’s social connection to the society in which they reside. The Division of labor is a broad process that affects and influences many aspects of life such as political, judicial, and administrative functions (Bratton & Denham, 2014). Two of the main sociological theorists, Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim, had different understandings of the notion about the division of labor. This topic has been contested and debated by many theorists but this paper is going to focus on how Emile Durkheim and Karl Marx views this topic. Karl Marx views the division of labor as a process that alienates the individual from their work (Llorente, 2006). Marx also views the division of labor as a way for the capitalist bourgeoisie to take advantage of the wage labor of the proletariat. Emile Durkheim identifies with Marx in the economic sense that the division of labor furthers the rationalization and bureaucratization of labor, but differs in that the division of labor provides individuals in society with social solidarity and ensures their connection to society. This paper is going to reflect on some of the aspects in which Emile Durkheim and Karl Marx view the division of labor, while showing some of the similarities and differences between the two theorists conception of the topic.

Division of labour is also credited with the rise of trade between different areas, the rise of capitalism, and increasingly complex manufacturing and industrialization. For Karl Marx, the production portion of Capitalism signalled great trouble. He believed production in Capitalist society worked in a way that the rich factory owner benefited and the poor factory workers lost. In his manner of reasoning, the Capitalist system was inherently meant to benefit the rich and exploit the poor: “All the bourgeois economists are aware of is that production can be carried on better under the modern police than on the principle of might makes right. They forget only that this principle is also a legal relation, and that the right of the stronger prevails in their ‘constitutional republics’ as well, only in another form.”[ii] Marx’s view of society and the world lead him to believe that humans create change in their lives and in their environment through practical activity in the practical world.

Adam Smith and Karl Marx are both famous for their philosophies on economics, more specifically the division of labor. For each of them the division of labor is rather similar in its definition, but the outcome of the division of labor differs drastically from Smith to Marx. For Smith the division of labor leads to mass production and allows large amounts of people to get things that were once available only to the rich. Smith believes that small specialized tasks leads to the invention of new technologies, and that individuals working selfishly to better themselves in the capitalistic world is beneficial to everyone. For Marx the division of labor is more about the relationship between the employee and the employer. He believes that

Division of labor might seem like a theory that work flawlessly but there are problems it has to deal with. Industries such as farming are not possible to encourage a division of labor. Smith has brought out that farming required a one man task with plowing, seeding, and harvesting because they are

As the famous rap group Mobb Deep once said, “Cash rules everything around me cream, get the money. Dollar dollar bill yalllll”, they weren’t lying. If one that gets things done is money, and in order to get money these corporation use the strategic ideology of division of labor to get their products going. Division of labor is a practice that every corporation does with its workers. It narrows specialization of tasks within a production process so that each worker can become a specialist in doing one thing. Especially on an assembly line. In traditional industries, division of labor is a major motive force for economic-growth. With this practice products get finished quicker and sold quicker as well, which brings in the money flowing hence why it’s an important practice and its everywhere. At restaurants, we have waiters/servers, host, cooks, managers, food runners, and busser, this gets people seated faster, attended to quicker, and food cooked in a timely manner (most times). I believe without this a lot of places would in fact be a mess without, just like Emile Durkheim. She believes that division of labor is beneficial to our society and I mostly agree with her statement. Karl Marx also finds Division of Labor necessary to have multiple number of workers under one capitalist. As for Adam Smith, his main focus is growth. Smith believes that growth is rooted in the practice of division of labor. Each of these people agree that division of labor is a necessity in our

The division of labor is a core concept among many sociologists including Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, Adam Smith and Emile Durkheim. Each theorist has their own unique opinion on this concept, however some share ideas. This essay will discuss those similarities and differences, while also proving how each author believes the division of labor will play out in contemporary society, how it connects to other concepts like capitalism and politics, and how it produces and sustains economic and social forms of inequality.

Marx believed that, through class consciousness, the workers would eventually recognize they were being exploited, and put an end to privilege. That they would revolt against their oppressors and end Capitalism once and for all; and a new utopia of equality under Communism would emerge.

As a cause and as a symptom of social hierarchies, division of labor is an integral part of the structuring of society. Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim both give very different interpretations to the effects causing, evolving, and caused by this division of labor. On one hand, Marx typically vilifies the process, finding it in large part responsible for the oppression of one group by another. On the other hand, Durkheim treats it as a unifying social force, one necessarily maintained for the betterment of all. With such contrasting viewpoints, it is difficult to decide whether this process is necessarily good or bad. In effect, the argument is how far must individual needs be sacrificed for the benefit of society, or how much society must be

At the time Marx started writing his theories, the Industrial Revolution was taking place. Feudalism had been done away with, and the people who had been living on the common land allowed to them by lords were forced to leave. Without land or a livelihood that had previously been found in farming, people flocked to the cities to find work. With the Industrial Revolution also came an advance in technology. Ambitious people with enough capital goods and money started factories and soon came to be known as capitalists. An economy based on capitalism, a system that revolves around private ownership of the means of production, typically by a select few, was born. With the flood of newcomers to the cities, there were more than enough people to work the factories, so the capitalists did not have to take into account the workers opinions for fear of losing laborers. Marx felt that this allowed the capitalists to exploit their workers and not pay them what their labor should be worth. He also felt that capitalism was a system that thrived off of havoc and

As civilization forms, there is a desperate call for a new idea called "division of labor." It was a

In The Division of Labor in Society, there are four parts: the problem, the function, the causes, and the forms of the divisions of labor. In his work, he critiqued and analyzed these aspects in great detail. Thinking on society Durkheim came to realization that the forces of production and capital were leading the industries, businesses, and agriculture of the time towards a specialization of occupations (Nelson 2013a). He realized that this was not only present in the world of economics but also the judicial, administrative, aesthetic and even his world of philosophy as well which was leading to a state of moral conflict and antagonism. This lead to the second part of his work, the function, in which Durkheim believed, was not a moral rule since it

According to Durkheim, inter-dependence and division of labor creates organic solidarity which holds everybody in modern society together. In modern societies, people usually have different beliefs, goals and jobs, but everybody depends on each other to live. Each of us does a specialized job in order to keep the entire system working. For example, I don’t farm but still have vegetables to eat because somebody farms for the whole society, including me. We are bonded together by the division of labor and the reliance on each other. However, while Durkheim thinks that division of labor is the base of social cohesion, Marx thinks that society is divided by class differences which are created by the division of labor. Marx claims that class difference

Tremendous economic and technological growth marked by the industrial revolution that was beginning to take shape at in the 19th century. With this change also brought a process of greater specialization in the workforce, also known as the division of labor. Both Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim, under this context of burgeoning market economy, sought to understand modern society and the underlying relations that lead to their formation and progress. In this essay, I will argue that while both Marx and Durkheim acknowledge the role of economic growth as a main driver of human society in their theories, they differ on the type of social relations that developed in tandem, relations that formed the basis of the division of labor. Marx (1978, p. 212) views the division of labor as a result of the capitalism driven by profit, while Durkheim (1984, p. 1) sees it as a necessary condition for social progress. Next, I will also explore differences both writers posit as the consequences for this process, relating to both Marx’s theory of labor alienation and Durkheim’s idea of organic solidarity.

Karl Marx believes that division of labour means a way in which workers of an organization were given a job at which they were good at or at which they had their specialty in. Max Weber viewed division of labour as an important element or characteristic of any bureaucratic organization that is functioning in the modern society. Emile Durkheim believed that division of labour was the outcome of a societal procedure that takes place within the structure of the society than the result of choices that have been made by individuals.