Emile Durkheim (Functionalist)

Division of Labour
Adam Smith
 Modern industrial society is due to increasing D.O.L.
 Industrial production is efficient as machines are powered not by muscular energy but due to
hydrocarbons which are inanimate sources of energies. Thus a much greater supply of energy
is available. But this is possible only if proper coordination is maintained.
Durkheim
 ‘division of labour’ is not peculiar to economic life, but political, administrative, judicial, arts,
science… all functions are becoming more and more specialized
 According to him, cause of D.O.L. is to be seen in preceding social facts and consequence of
social facts is to be seen a society as a whole.
 Book : "Division of Labour"
o solidarity is present in modern society but in a different form and content, compared to
simple societies.
 Durkheim says that, “The division of labour varies in direct proportion to the volume and
density of society and if it progresses in a continuous manner over the course of social
development it is because societies becomes regularly more dense and generally more
voluminous.”
 According to Durkheim, though DOL normally should lead to increased interaction and
interdependence and hence increased organic solidarity, he argues that in ‘abnormal’ cases
the lack of common sentiments (mechanical solidarity) may promote isolation of individuals
as they specialize more and more and hence lead to anomie.

Auguste Comte
 increased concentration over limited area, means increased competition between them in
the given area. This facilitates social evolution, whereby it either stimulates individuals to put
forth fresh efforts using refined methods, or by acting with greater energy and persistence in
more concerted fashion increasing one’s specialisation
Critics
 David Lockwood
o in his study mentions the lack of clarity in Durkheim’s idea between levels of integration,
which drives into erroneous (wrong) conclusion. Durkheim said that high division of
labour would lead to higher solidarity, Lockwood says, there are two integrations i.e.
system and social.
Social Fact
Durkheim
 defined Sociology as essentially the study of social facts and explanation of such facts in a
sociological manner
 believed that society is supreme and not the individual
 Durkheim believed that the subject matter of sociology is social facts i.e. those aspects of
thinking and acting which are independent of individual, coercive and general in nature.
Ritzer
 Durkheim distinguish between 2 kinds of social facts namely
o Material social facts
 o Non-material social facts.
Critics
 Max Weber
o ‘Developing sociology on the line of natural sciences was a blunder on the part of
positivists’. He believes that natural sciences deal with objects whereas sociology with
subjects, hence the rules of natural sciences cannot be applied on society.
 Nicholas Timasheff
o He believes that while developing sociology on the lines of science, Durkheim became
most unscientific by ignoring individual consciousness. Individual without consciousness
is like animals. While studying social fact Durkheim completely ignores individual
capability of independent thinking. A society cannot be imagined, while undermining the
consciousness of individual
 George Kathleen
o Believes that individual merely do not follow the collective sentiment rather through
their individual efforts, vision, wisdom etc. they change the norms of society. Social
reformers, revolutionaries etc. comes in this category but social facts does not consider
these or accepts these facts
 Raymond Aron
o Believed that Durkheim’s sociology is an orthodox sociology. He explained sociology as
well integrated parts which he called social physiology. In reality cooperation-conflict,
love-hate, conformity-deviance all exist together but Durkheim ignored these things in
this perspective.
Suicide
Critics
 J.W.Darwis
o Believed that primarily suicide is an individual fact than the social fact. In any society,
human resources are highly valued and no society provokes its individual to commit
suicide. It is a crime in almost all societies
 J.B. Doug:
o In his study says that explaining suicide only in terms of social facts is at best incomplete
in itself. We can’t ignore individual meanings. In fact, a successful suicide is once in a
lifetime thing. Such a vital decision being taken without rationality looks incomplete
 Gabriel Tarde: The imitation theory of suicide of Gabriel Tarde
o He believes that there are a lot of cases of suicide individual hears here and there when
they come in a particular situation, they follow one of it. He found that after the case of
suicide of a celebrity in US, lots of people followed the same for some time. David Philips
in his study found Tarde’s theory true. He found that whenever there was a celebrity
committed suicide, the suicide rates shoot up, because people identify themselves with
celebrities. So, imitations have a role to play. This is suggestibility that suicide is right
thing to do.
 Marris:
o Believed that suicide is mainly a psychological phenomena because accepting the
pressure in unfavourable situations is not same of every individual. He believes that the
psychological or individual reason cannot be ignored
 Atkinson:
 o He questions Durkheim claims that, rates of suicide are a factual order existing by itself
as if official statistics are permanently valid. He questions the data itself. He says officials
can’t decide nature of suicide or even say whether it is a suicide or not. It is just done by
attributing common sense meanings/assumptions. Also in poor and developing
countries, official records can be manipulated. So, we can’t claim data to be infallible.
And once data itself is faulty, theory is an obvious fault.
 Douglas:
o He also says that there is a built in bias for data in Durkheim’s theory. Douglas also says
that, in Europe suicide is stigmatized. If suppose in a community, where solidarity is high,
they will not report death as suicides, but report it as an accident. So, in societies of high
integration, there is low reporting. But in societies of low integration, there is high
reporting
Religion & Society
Durkheim
 He believed modern religion, though essentially performing same functions, is marked by a
myriad (a large indefinite number) of ideologies, and decorations and it would be difficult to
study the primitive religions, which was predecessor to all religions, which share only but all
essential elements of religion, as it would be easier to study them, as entire clan had total
moral and intellectual conformity to the religion.
 believed totemism to be simplest and most primitive form of religion.
 Durkheim argued religion is all about setting apart of sacred from the profane
 Durkheim says that, people who worship a common totem identify themselves with a
common name. They behave as if they are related to each other by blood. They also
recognize duties and obligations towards each other which includes participation in
celebration, mourning, vengeance and an obligation of not to marry each other
 Durkheim says Totemic beliefs are real forces. They are seen as forces lying outside
individuals and they have moral authority over individuals. They create moral obligation.
Furthermore, this force is seen as continuous form of individual change.
 Durkheim’s theory of religion, society is the source of all superior moral power which inspires
individuals; and Religion symbolically embodies (represents) society itself. In Brief god is
society & religion is symbol
 defines religion as ‘a religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices which unite into a
single moral community called church, all those who adhere to them.
 Christianity said, god created man in his own image. But Durkheim said man created god in
his own image. Flag didn’t create Indian, but Indian created flag. Religion is now only a
symbolic representation in society.
Critics
 Alexander Goldenweiser :
o He criticized Durkheim’s theory on three grounds:
 How Durkheim can claim that Arunta is the most primitive tribe and their religion is
the most ancient religion of world?
 In many of the primitive communities, Goldenweiser found that the totem is
different and they are worshipping something else. Thus, it cannot be said that
totem is the God.
 In simple societies, the distinguishness between sacred and profane can be made
easily but not in complex societies.
 o Goldenweiser in 1915–16 and 1918 criticized Lang, Frazer, and Durkheim and insisted
that totemism had nothing to do with religion; he held instead that man in no way
viewed his totem as superior to himself or as a deified being but viewed it as his friend
and equal

 Edmund Leach:
o He criticized this theory by calling it an ‘over—functionalist theory’. Durkheim had never
discussed the dysfunctional aspect of religion like superstitions, exploitations, communal
violence on the name of religion. For him, religion is always functional for the society
which is one-sided view.

o
Raymond Firth
o He said that origin of religion is a mysterious phenomena whose evolution cannot be
identified by a particular theory. It has lots of reason and characteristic that a single
theory cannot explain its form and origin. Any single claim cannot be right claim.
Relevance to third world countries
o Durkheim said religion can survive as basis of solidarity and to that extent such attempts can
be explained as to why mono culturalism in being imposed on plural societies.
o Durkheim says goal of life is increasingly becoming secular, which is true, but religious
revivalism is also taking place simultaneously. Real relations are becoming unsustainable and
so we get into new relations to have certainty.
o John Kenneth Galbraith said in capitalism Man exploits man, and in socialism, it is other way
round. In fact in communist state, Lenin and Stalin were new Russian czars. No difference in
nature of rule except of Labels.
Education
 Education was defined by Durkheim as the process by which the individual acquires the
physical, intellectual and moral tools to function in a society
 Schools as the institution provide a social foundation for modern morality. He argued through
collective effervescence in the small classroom society, morality can be inculcated into
individuals.
 On conflict between managers and workers, he rejected Marxian thesis of inherent
contradiction and argued that this due to lack of common morality. He found out occupational
associations as an integrating institution which was social and professional at the same time.

Sociology of Knowledge
 Durkheim argued that it is through rituals the moral power of society is transformed into
religious symbols which bind individuals to the group.
 he argues that this moral bond becomes a cognitive bond because the categories of
understanding, such as classification, time, space and causation are also derived from religious
rituals
 He argued that human knowledge is not a product of experience alone, nor are people born
with certain mental categories to be applied to experience. He argues that categories are social
creation, they are collective representations.
 Durkheim sees science as developing out of religion rather than being opposed to religion. He
also explains why certain categories have developed universally despite of their autonomous
development, on the bases that they were essential for social life