Emile Durkheim, Karl Marx, And Max Weber

The sociological imagination is an empathetic approach to understanding an individual by examining their biography (this includes all life experiences and upbringing) as well as the historical events that took place during their lifetime. (Basirico) It was developed by C. Right Mills. Sociological imagination explores how events in history affect a generation 's way of thinking. It also takes into perspective the personal biography of an individual that exploits the interworking of an individual mind and social status due to nature and nurture, culture, socio-economic standing, geography and other influences. It gives outsiders a better picture of why an individual act and thinks the way they do as a direct result

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.

Karl Marx and Max Weber were influential sociologists that paved the way for modern sociological school of thought. Both, Karl Marx and Max Weber contributed a lot to the study and foundation of sociology. Without their contributions sociology would not be as prominent as it is today. From the contribution of how sociology should be studied, to how they applied their theories to everyday life has influenced many sociologists. Predominantly, both of these theorists’ discussed the effects of capitalism, how it has developed, shaped and changed society into what it is today. Specifically, Karl Marx’s contribution of the bourgeoisie vs. the proletariat class and Max Weber’s social stratification has helped individuals to understand how modern day society has transformed into what it is today. Particularly, this paper will lie out Weber’s theory of social stratification and Marx’s theory of the bourgeoisie vs. the proletariat class; additionally this essay will also compare and contrast the ideas of these two influential sociologists. Finally this essay will criticize both of these sociologists’ theories and display that Marx and Weber do not explain how modern day society and classes have been formed.

Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, and Max Weber were three historical sociologists. Their views have become world renown and have shaped many ways of interpreting the social structure of many modern societies. This essay will take a glimpse into the three sociologists’ ideals and expose the similarities and differences they may have.

Along with his study on social facts, he also focused some on the Division of Labor. Many people during this time believed that the social order of things was in danger due to the selfishness of society as a whole. While Marx believed that capitalism was a bad thing and was bringing down society, Durkheim believed that it was a good thing and it pulled society together. As times progressed, so did society. Durkheim began to look at the solidarity of society. He categorized them into two different types mechanical and organic solidarity. . (Ritzer 2004) I believe that Durkheim thought

C. Wright Mills, author of “The Sociological Imagination”, explains how the sociological imagination plays a part in human development, and how certain social forces affecting the lives of those who are constantly facing hardships. He explains that the problems that we face as human beings involve the history of social factors. In order to understand one’s personal biography, you would have to be able to know how social history affects your life. By him saying that “The sociological imagination enables us to grasp history and biography and the relations between the two within society. That is its task and its promise” (Mills, 1959: 15), he means that the history that we experienced has an impact on our everyday lives. The correlation between history and biography can help us understand why we experience the things that we experience. Mills goes on to explain that our personal problems are, instead, wider public issues that have been

The sociological imagination as described by C. Wright Mills is “the ability to understand the intersection between biography and history or interplay of self and the world.” (13) Mills also describes the sociological imagination by saying, “we have come to know every individual lives, from one generation to the next, in some society; that he lives out a biography, and that he lives out within some historical sequence. By the fact of his living he contributes, however minutely, to the shaping of this society and to the course of its history, even as he is made by society and by its historical push and shove.” (1) In saying this statement, Mills leads us into what he calls the history and the biography of sociological imagination. Mills describes history has being part of the individual and biography being part of society. In an excerpt from his book, The Sociological Imagination, he talks about how troubles are our history. Mills states, “troubles occur within the character of the individual and within the range of his immediate relations with other; they have to do with self ad with those limited areas of social life of which he is directly and personally aware.” Mills says this about biography, “Issues have to do with matters that transcend these local environments of the individual and the range of his inner life.” (2)

Compare and contrast the various early European urban theorists as found in Chapter 1 of the course text. (300-400 words)

Though Karl Marx and Alexis de Tocqueville differ, they both contributed greatly to revolutionary concepts of their era. To better understand the analyses between politics, social, and economic changes Marx and Tocqueville discuss, we must first understand the shift of their time and the need for sociological analysis. The 19th century was a time of change and adaptation for everyone and few scholars were capable and willing to understand the impacts these changes would have on society and its entities. Both industrial and democratic revolutions affected their times and created shifts in society. The industrialization affected many aspects of society. It created a structural change in the economy shifting from agrarian income to industrial and commercial income. Technology impacted labour force and production shifting to large-scale manufacturing creating new types of investments. These changes affected class structure, migration, and workers which in turn affected economy and a shift in politics.

The theoretical works of Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim and Max Weber still influence sociological theory. Though their works are decades old they still are a major part of what sociology is today. Though their theories can seem very different, there are some similarities. To become a great sociologist one most learn and understands how to use all sociological perspectives. To do this one must understand and use the different theoretical perspectives created by Marx, Durkheim, and Weber.

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,

Karl Marx and Marx Weber The latter part of the nineteenth century was teeming with evolved

When people look at the world, they see it is structured in a specific way. Each perspective varies depending on the person. For instance, when looking at classical theory in sociology, there exists three viewpoints on society. Karl Marx believed the world based on conflict while Weber made sense of it by viewing the meanings. As for Durkheim, he made sense of it through social cohesion. Unlike Marx, whose primary focus was conflict, Durkheim’s writing centered around how people were capable of coexisting harmoniously.

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 and Max Weber both appealed to me in the reading of chapter 1. They both have similarities and differences on their approaches to sociology. While reading the background of Emile, I found it fascinating how he studied sociology in a way that he put together the individual dimensions and added them together to better understand a society or social group. The case of suicide rates and religion. This one case can be analyzed through other elements, such as careers. For instance, the type of profession can be studied. I am really into statistics and like to break down information. The way he broke down the information to analyze a society or social groups interested me. Max Weber, I chose to write about because I felt he had a