Emile Durkheim's Theories on Suicide Essay

Emile Durkheim was one of the most influential people to write about suicide and its causes. Suicide had previously been thought to be a moral and psychological problem whereas Durkheim related suicide to sociological problems in modern society. He believed and worked to prove that suicide was not related to individualism but linked to the effects of the external influences of modern society. External social influences upon an individual covered the broad and varied aspects such as culture, religion and family. Durkheim believed that suicide was directly related to the level of social integration and/or regulation of a person in society. He developed groups into which an individual was categorised according to their level of integration

The interpretivist approach directly contrasts the positivist one and seeks to focus on the meanings of suicide for those involved. Douglas criticises Durkheim's use of official statistics as they are not accurate and recommends qualitative studies to discover the real rate of suicide. The statistics are a result of a coroners label and thus it is not trustworthy in his view. This suggested that cases are decided on "the basis of probability”. Douglas further seeks to find out the meaning of the suicide

“Suicide is applied to all cases of death resulting directly or indirectly from a positive or negative act of the victim himself, which he knows will produce this result” (Durkheim 34). Suicide is a phenomenon that has plagued our world since the beginning of time. It currently accounts for the second leading cause of death in people ages ten to twenty-four years old (Garni Powerpoint). This means of ending your own life is something we can prevent as a society. If we can eliminate societal pressures and stereotypes we can all be treated equally. All suicides during a certain time period are grouped together, when in all reality we should be treating each situation as it’s own. Durkheim states “...with it’s own unity, individuality, and consequently its own nature- a nature, furthermore, dominantly social”.

Durkheim’s theories and work on suicide classified the phenomenon into four types; Egoistic, Altruistic, Anomic and Fatalistic (Ritzer Pg 200-202). Durkheim’s concept of social integration ties into egoistic suicide as it

The debate between Mark A.R. Kleinman and Ira Byock discuss the topic of suicide whether it should be legal or not; Kleinman is arguing for suicide to be legal, which will come to the conclusion that suicide should be allowed for anyone and not have any punishment for an attempt. Byock argues the opposing argument that suicide should be illegal, but the focus of this argument will be Kleiman’s point of view. The exigency, the problem that can be fixed, is viewed in this argument that it is the people’s right to kill themselves and this is due to the depression and/or the feeling of thinking they are better off dead. The audience directed towards this argument is people committing suicide and those who oppose the people committing the ‘crime’ of suicide. Constraints, the biases, in this situation would be ethical beliefs and the people who have witnessed or experienced these suicidal thoughts. Kleinman’s reasoning is the use of emotion and human rights are seen to enhance his argument. Therefore suicide should not be legal, it should be treated instead of encouraged.

In the study of philosophy, it is evident that there are notions that agree and disagree with each other. When we narrow down philosophical time periods, it is even more interesting to see how ideas conflict in such a short period of time. As we observe the period between Georg Hegel and Friedrich Nietzsche, we are approached with an array of beliefs as religious philosophy is combined with non-religious philosophy. The undeniable aspect is that each concept can be adequately compared. In studying Georg Hegel, John Stuart Mill, Arthur Schopenhauer, and Friedrich Nietzsche, it is evident that each takes a supreme stance on morality. Therefore, I propose the question, “Is it morally permissible to commit suicide”? By analyzing each philosophical approach to this question, each philosopher’s notion on the concept will be revealed.

Although no incidences of suicide were referenced in the article, this increased interaction could lead to an increase in both egoistic and altruistic suicide. Durkheim’s theory on anomic suicide states: “People are more likely to kill themselves when they do not know what is expected of them, when regulation is low, and they are largely free to run wild. This mad pursuit is likely to prove unsatisfying and, as a

Susanna Kaysen once said, “Suicide is a form of murder - premeditated murder…you need the means, the opportunity, the motive. A successful suicide demands good organization and a cool head, both of which are usually incompatible with the suicidal state of mind.” Being the 10th leading cause of death in the world, Suicide is a serious public health problem that many people know about but will never fully understand. The never-ending question tied to this phenomenon is what can cause a person to take his or her own lives. With the help of Emile Durkheim’s theory I can finally somewhat understand that it is not just an individual factor but also based on the society around the individual.

In The Politics of Suicide, Maria Teresa Brancaccio, Eric J. Engstrom, and David Lederer investigate and unravel the conceptualization and operationalization of suicide in the years leading up the Emile Durkheim. It wasn’t until the age of the Enlightenment that the concept of taking one’s own life was deemed worthy of scientific analysis (Brancaccio, Engstrom, & Lederer, 2013). It was during this time that police, physicians, and mental health care providers began to determine the indicators of such potential behaviors and began to see such rising trends as modern social dilemma (2013).

Durkheim does not see egoism, altruism, anomie and fatalism as types of suicide, but types of social structure that highlight the presence or lack of integration and regulation. It must be stressed that this excess/lack of integration and regulation are not seen as direct causes of suicide, rather Durkheim sees a number of voluntary deaths in society as inevitable; integration and regulation are merely prophylactic to suicidal impulses, which when taken to excess or dramatically reduced, fail to act as a preventative, and so suicides occur. This clarification is an important strength of Durkheim’s theory: it allows the biography of the individuals who kill themselves to vary, while still explaining underlying pressures/lack of to explain their deaths, and the varying suicide rates between groups.

Finally, we have Fatalistic suicide, which occurs in societies with high levels of social regulation. This is only briefly discussed in Durkheim’s work, as he saw Fatalistic suicide, “as a rare phenomena in the real world.� (I1) An example might be someone with an overregulated and difficult life, like a slave.

Suicide has long been a part of society. By definition suicide is “the intentional taking of one's own life” (dictionary.com). Currently, there is a negative stigma associated with suicide, and the individuals that commit suicide are often stereotyped as depressed or in an unstable mental state. Despite society’s perspective, there are many different reasons for suicide. In “Suicide”, other reasons are brought to attention. Émile Durkheim’s, the author of this article, main argument in this study is that suicide is a general and broad term that can be broken down to form different and distinct categories. This concept is shown through three types of suicide: altruistic, egoistic, and most importantly anomic.

First, one may question whether such phenomenon caused by external force such as society but shared awareness from individuals. However, Durkheim defends it by the term of conscience collective, which is also a kind of a social fact and points out the strength of linking morality to discover social laws. Secondly, Durkheim’s classification of suicide form has limited the causes and types. Moreover, Durkheim concerned the causes of suicide only with social facts and rejected the relationship between suicide and personality in terms of psychology, as well as alcoholism. Additionally, the subject of suicide is more likely to exist in disordered societies thus leading to an unbalanced research, which is prone to the theory of pathology. As a result, the contribution of suicide to sociology is actually

How frequent do suicides occur? Worldwide, a suicide occurs every forty seconds, making it the 3rd leading cause of death in people ages 15-44 (Suicide Facts). With statistics as horrifying as these, it is to be expected that most people have an opinion on the matter. While beliefs, ideologies, religions, and cultural norms may shape personal preference on the subject, it can be argued that, from an ethical point of view, suicide is a valid and appropriate action. Through utilitarianism, deontology, and egoism with support from historical, cultural, and literary examples, I will show that suicide is an ethically sound choice, despite personal preferences.

Traditionally, suicide was thought to be a purely individual decision but French sociologist Emile Durkheim recognized that the phenomenon had a social dimension. He believed in the influence of society on the individual and that if anything can explain that relation, it is suicide. His use of the data of suicide, not specific cases and reports, to study the societal trends reveals his true subject of study: society as a whole and its role in the individual experience. Durkheim uses the study of suicide via the quantitative methodological approach as a tool to study society as a broader whole.