The Critique Of Durkheim's Theory Of Suicide

Suicide is regarded as the most common of individual actions, which Durkheim believed was influenced by the ‘social collective’ and not as a result of psychological causalities as other studies had tried to imply.

Although the four groups are varying in their relevance today due to the many changes in society since Durkheim first named them, they are still strongly recognizable in modern society. Egoistic Suicide relates to the degree of social interaction and the strength of mutual values within a social group. Some of the variables

“Suicide may be a way of expressing grievances. To this extent, it can be explained with a theory of social control. The central task of a theory of social control is to explain why, given that a conflict occurs, it is handled in one way and not another” (Manning,

Feelings of isolation have been linked to higher suicide rates. Durkheim’s study on suicide during the industrial revolution supports this theory as he states that, “people were increasingly disconnected from their communities and that this social upheaval had a greater effect on suicide rates than other factors like wealth” (Winner & Collishaw, 2011). Interestingly enough, despite the increase of media attention on suicide, no studies have been published that explain why suicide rates vary among different groups. However, various factors are involved in the decision to commit suicide. As a result, suicide rates vary according to race, gender and age.

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

For many the concept of teenage suicide is almost always correlated with the psychological mindset of the individuals. However, there is a lot of the factors behind these horrifying events that actually are more sociologically related. These catastrophic events are directly correlated with interactions with the world. The loss of teenagers across the world is increasing and it is a subject that should be touched on in both sciences. Throughout this paper the study of teen suicide in the sociological view will be discussed by going through Emile Durkheim’s studies and the sub groups in which it can occur. These events are related back to such things as social rejection, religious beliefs and social situations. This paper will also touch on the different types of suicide and what the suicides correlate with. The main purpose of this paper is to show how teen suicide is not only a psychological problem with students but to breakdown the areas in which cause these feelings.

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

By applying the functionalist perspective to the issue of suicide, we will highlight the importance of shared social morals and bonds. “When rapid social change or other disruptive conditions occur, moral values may erode, and people may become more uncertain about how to act and about whether or not their life has meaning” (Kendall , 2014) . Suicide falls under

According to Item A, suicides are based on coroner’s interpretations and differ across cultures as Danish coroner's base their verdicts on probability rather than English coroners who must find evidence to support their verdict as suicide. Durkheim identifies the difference in suicide rates across cultures and societies. Durkheim defines suicide as “all cases of death resulting directly or indirectly from positive or negative act of the victim himself”. He used suicide to demonstrate that positivistic and scientific methods of researching social topics was possible whereas interpretivists argue that to understand the

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.

Furthermore, social scientists have not been too involved in the topic of suicide. Since 1990-2009 there have not been many article on the topic and the disinterest can derive from the presumption that suicide is a lonesome act. The article “Suicide and the Creative Class,” states that, “Durkheim ([1897] 2006) illustrated that suicide is a social phenomenon by stating that levels of integration and

Durkheim’s findings suggested that suicide rates vary between societies but do show regular patterns over time. He concluded that this was evidence that there are consistent social forces that influence the rate of suicide in society. In sum, Durkheim believed that for society to maintain a state of equilibrium there needs to be an appropriate degree of integration and regulation; a consequence of any imbalance is an increased rate of suicide. However, despite Durkheim’s study of society being viewed by many as a classic, it has been met

The book “sociology” by john J. Mioni, express about one of the sociologist who studied suicide, which is one of the topics that connect with one of my event in my life. When I read about Durkheim, I love one of the quotes, which made me think too much and I connected with my event because one of my event is about suicide, and I believe is truth what Durkheim thought and said about suicide. We have to love who we are, not matter what but the reality is that we don’t love ourselves enough. As a result, I consider that we think through suicide when we feel like we can’t escape our problems, depressed, and do not find some other solutions to our problems, and there come the suicidal thought, and the first thing that we want is die. Therefore,

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.