Durkheim 's Views On Social Theorists

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.

Emile Durkheim, was a French sociologist. His theories and writings helped establish the foundations of modern sociology. Durkheim disagreed with most social theorists of the late 1800 's because they thought that individual psychology was the basis of sociology. Durkheim regarded sociology as the study of the society that surrounds and influences the individual. Durkheim explained his theories in his book The Rules of Sociological Method (1895). He says there is relationship between moral values and religious beliefs, which establishes unity in society.Emile Durkheim has long been viewed as one of the founders of the so called variables oriented approach to sociological investigation. Durkheim developed the theory that societies are bound together by two sources of unity. He called these sources mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity. Mechanical solidarity refers to similarities that many people in the society share, such as values and religious beliefs. Organic solidarity results from the division of labor into specialized jobs. Durkheim believed that the division of labor makes people depend on one another and thus helps create unity in a society. Durkheim studied thousands of cases of suicide to demonstrate his theory that a person commits suicide because of the

Durkheim believed that the division of labor would individualize the people and would create differences amongst the people in a society. Not only does he believe that the division of labor is necessary for civilization to play out like Smith said, but he also said it was a desire for people to be different from each other. Unlike Marx, he believed that this division and differentiation of labor was allowing for a different morale that catered to this system. Even though society is differentiating, it does not mean that the morality of the people is being lost. In fact, he believed that this division of labor was producing what he called an, organic solidarity or morale in which an individual becomes more differentiated from others around him, yet are still integrated in the larger society (Durkheim DL: 37). In contrast to Marx, he believed that division of labor did not create alienation but rather it allowed for people to interact more, as the solidarity changes, people find meaning in their work. Durkheim said that “teach organ, in fact, has its special characteristics, its autonomy, and yet, the greater the unity of the organism, the more marked is the individuation of its parts (Durkheim, DL, 38). The individual becomes more dependent on society. Like Smith, he believed that the division of labor allows for a

“Treat social facts as things” is an expression that epitomises the works of Emile Durkheim. This essay focuses on four main sociological concepts proposed by the functionalist Emile Durkheim; the division of labour; mechanical and organic solidarity; anomie and suicide, and examines their relevance in contemporary society.

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

Karl Marx' and Émile Durkheim's body of work attempts to structurally analyze society as well as determine whether or not the societal system is functioning properly. The differences in their logic are representative in each of their respective paradigms. Marx argues that structurally, capitalism is inherently flawed due to the necessity of class inequality causing conflict. Durkheim suggests that society is generally a good thing, important for social cohesion and development, but when a specific institution begins to fail in society, the institution can be pathologically diagnosed and 'cured' of its problems. In this paper I shall argue that these writers formulate their paradigms in descriptive terms to objectively determine problems within

Well Barrack, my name is Emile Durkheim and I’m here to talk to you about my views on division of labor. The division of labor is a characteristic of industrial capitalist societies. My definition of division of labor is similar to Marx, as specialization, but for me they don’t solely focus on the economic consequences. We expect better specialized workers. Our division of labor creates a social unity. A collective consciousness, a totality of beliefs and sentiments common to the average member in society. We focus on the workers and not only on the work.

Furthermore, Durkheim introduces the concept of collective conscience. When people riot at a sporting event, each individual share the same aggression and mindset to vandalize property and cause harm to the opposing team, in short, the chaos explains collective conscience. Durkheim defines collective conscience as, “totality of beliefs and sentiments common to average citizens of the same society.” CITE Fans who are at a sporting event belongs to a subculture, they all share the same beliefs and ideas.

Due to the rise of capitalism, people’s working lives have changed drastically in the developed world. Two theorists, Emile Durkheim and Karl Marx both have views and theories that can describe people in the working world today. Durkheim is pro capitalism, believing that social solidarity is necessary to maintain social order, while Karl Marx is very structural and believes that capitalism will lead to a revolution among society. Durkheim’s anomie theory and Marx’s concept of alienation both have developed with modernity, however differ greatly. Emile Durkheim believes that each person holds a place in this world that is based on society’s moral values, however certain social forces (like capitalism for example) disintegrate the morality of society as a whole.

Durkheim, Emile. 1964. The Division of Labor in Society. Translated by George Simpson. New York: Free Press. Originally published in 1893. Durkheim had in mind the idea that society needed deviance to continually reaffirm its boundaries of propriety. Functional arguments for the importance of deviance are rather intriguing. They provide a novel way of showing how certain institutions in a society, if not the society itself, continue to operate. Durkheim points out, for example, that without the existence of sinners, a church could not exist. Their very existence provides the opportunity for believers to reaffirm the faith that has been offended by the sinner. Thus, the worst thing that could happen to a church is to completely eliminate

After determining what resulted from modernization, Durkheim unlike Marx was interested in reforming not eliminating modern society. In analyzing Durkheim’s theory of modern society, I will begin with the focal point of it, namely solidarity.

In this essay, using Durkheim’s perspective and Roger and Me, we will analyze how the division of labor can functionally shape a society within a certain period of time. Significantly, Emile Durkheim was one of the three major theoretical thinkers of sociology. In effect, the functionalism perspective derives from the analyses of Emile Durkheim. The functionalist perspective is molded by different parts working together.

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.

Emile Durkheim was born in 1858, in a small community in Alsace-Lorraine, and became a professor of sociology at the Sorbonne in Paris. Emile Durkheim came from an early positivist school of thought that insisted sociology needs to be looked at as a scientific discipline, which could be modelled off the natural sciences. This approach helped Durkheim use scientific methods of analysis, statistics and empirical information to assist in determining circumstances that contributed to human behavior, for which the psychology discipline couldn’t answer at the time. Durkheim was the pioneer of social science and contributed a tremendous amount to the social science community.

Durkheim argues that within this society its members are allocated within the division of labour depending on the amount of merits you have and so the more merits you gain the more rewards you will have. Thus Durkheim argued that in this modern society in order to maintain order moral and economical regulations are needed.