Durkheim 's Influence On Poverty

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.

As I read Émile Durkheim’s classic piece, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, I experienced a whirlwind of thoughts, expressing agreement, disagreement, and complete puzzlement over the details of his logic and conclusions. As far as my essay goes, I will attempt to put these thoughts in a neat, coherent order like the one mentioned above.

Social facts have existence as a separate entity and it does not get affected by the individual behavior. In other words, social facts are the outcome of the state of the collective mind. The stress on the above feature makes sociology different from the rules of sociological method. Further, in favor of his argument Durkheim says that as an individual of the society the person inculcates automatically the behavioral deeds and actions with or without prior knowledge. No one is coercive on the imposition of laws and rules. If anyone goes against he is fined or a penalty is imposed for not obeying the laws of the society. To put forth his ideas in an effective manner he argues that society as a whole is an amalgamation of political platforms, partial groups such as literary schools, religious organizations etc which are bonded through certain sentiments. In his opinion, if the individual does not act in favor of a group and its principles that work for good cause and the betterment of the individuals and the society, he is made to face everything alone leading to atrocities and horrifying incidents.

Please describe the impact Marx, Durkheim, & Weber had on sociology as prominent contributors of the discipline.

Emile Durkheim is considered to be the Father of Sociology. In contrast to Karl Marx’s theory of Sociology, Durkheim believed that society is made up of a bunch of social facts and can be studied empirically. Durkheim did put a lot of emphasis on the idea of social facts. This made him stand apart from all other theorists and their ideas. (Ritzer 2004) This is what Durkheim said of social facts.

In DHN, Durkheim argues that sociology must examine what an individual consists of because it is a result of the whole society. It is this society

Along with Marx and Weber, Durkheim is considered one of the founding members of modern sociology. He is also credited with making sociology a science through his application of scientific and empirical research. Durkheim believed that sociology should be seen as a science separate from other sciences such as psychology, by studying “social facts” objectively as things. (Kiviston, 2011)

In regards to (a) social facts, Durkheim refers to ideas, values and concepts that a society has developed over time and where each individual within this society shares. These ideas, values and concepts develop into behavioural patterns among the society and ultimately reach a point where

Poverty is visible anywhere and it happens everywhere, from the richest nations to the poorest. From the youth to the elderly, poverty can dramatically affect anyone. Some grow up in poverty, while others end up in it. Poverty has increased drastically over the years. The blame for the increased poverty has become an extremely controversial subject, as there are many contributing factors to spite each side. It is evident that it is the people in poverty themselves that is the underlying cause of it due to their insignificant will power and their choice to live off the government rather than working themselves.

Another theory that relates to poverty is the conflict theory. Conflict theory is a paradigm that sees social conflict as the basis of society and social change and emphasizes a materialistic view of society, a critical view of the status quo, and a dynamic model of historical change (Ferris & Stein, 2008, 2010). The theory was originally brought on by Karl Marx, and was later adapted and further developed by other theorists; for example, Max Weber. Looking at poverty through the lens of the conflict theory, we

Many sociological theorists who were relevant over a century ago are also still applicable to today’s society. Whilst parts of the theory and the context of the theories may have quite dated, some parts do still reign true. Some theories however, like Marx’s ideas of a capitalist society, have become more influential in today’s economic climate. Perspectives like Durkheim’s theories of suicide, Marx’s theories on Capitalism and changes to economic status, Weber’s input on Capitalism and his influential work on Religion. The ideas this essay will be focusing upon are the ‘iconic’ theories, that the previously mentioned sociologists are known for and showing how these theories have progressed through the time.

There was once a time when the societies of the world were nothing more than a ruling class and a class that was ruled. In these feudal societies classes were set. There was little chance for a member of the ruling bourgeoisie class to cross over to the oppressed proletariat class or from the proletariat class to the bourgeoisie class. Every individual within each class had the routine for each day set out for him or her. There was little change in the lives of individuals of these societies. There was monotony in their work and their work did little more for them than keeping them alive. In those societies,

Essay Question: Why is the concept of social facts so significant for Durkheim’s work? Illustrate your answer with reference to at least one of his studies.

The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were full of evolving social and economic ideas. These views of the social structure of urban society came about through the development of ideas taken from the past revolutions. As the Industrial Revolution progressed through out the world, so did the gap between the class structures. The development of a capitalist society was a very favorable goal for the upper class. By using advanced methods of production introduced by the Industrial Revolution, they were able to earn a substantial surplus by ruling the middle class. Thus, maintaining their present class of life, while the middle class was exploited and degraded. At this time in history, social

Emile Durkheim was considered one of the greats of the sociology world. His use of scientific methodology to identify social factors which contributed to suicide has produced a foundational model for empirically based social research still relevant in sociology today. The purpose of this essay is to examine Durkheim’s study of the social causes of suicide, specifically how his theory of social integration and regulation contributed in interpreting these differences in suicide rates. This essay will argue that although heavily criticised Durkheim’s findings of the social factors which contributed to suicide are still relevant in Australia today more than a century later. In order to support this claim, firstly an overview of Durkheim’s social theory will be provided, specifically of his social causes of suicide. In addition it will then focus on how Durkheim interpreted these differences in suicide rates between various groups using his theory of social integration and discuss the two types of suicide Durkheim identified in this area. We will then discuss social regulation and its two forms of suicide. Criticism of his theory will then be discussed, before providing relevant statistics from Australia in regards to suicide rates of teen and indigenous communities and examine these figures to explain these variances in light of Durkheim’s social theory’s, to support the fact that Durkheim’s theory’s are still relevant in Australia today. Emile Durkheim was born in 1858 in a