Durkheim Case

1.0 Introduction

Durkheim was a contemporary of Weber, but his work was very much different. Both

Marx and Weber are generally known as conflict theorists. But, Durkheim believed that

harmony, rather than conflict, defined society. He had different ideas considering social facts,

solidarity and societal cohesion. He examines social facts with regard to their purpose in

producing or facilitating social cohesion. He studied the division of labor, from this point of

view. While Weber was preoccupied with rationality, Durkheim is mainly concerned with

solidarity: what holds society together? Durkheim believed that solidarity was the normal form

of society, and although he recognized the disorder associated with industrialization, he

considered conflict abnormal. Durkheim seems in general confident about the prospects for

modern society and the division of labor; nevertheless, he also has fears and apprehensions with

regards to the same. So as to understand these fears and apprehensions it is moreover important

to look at what the division of labor is, and how it has emerged; the shift from primitive society

to modern society.

1.1 Forms of Solidarity

While the division of labor might be at first being taken as only an economic term,

Durkheim believed its true purpose to be in increasing solidarity between people. He defines

solidarity as "cohesion of human groups into a social unity" and identifies two types of

solidarity:

a) mechanical

b) organic

2

1.1(a) Mechanical Solidarity

A primitive society is characterized by mechanical solidarity. These societies tended to

be small and homogeneous, meaning there is little differentiation in the kinds of labor that

individuals engage in. Social relations are regulated by a shared system of beliefs, what

Durkheim called the common conscience. A typical example is a situation in which the father is

the hunter whereas the mother is the career and housekeeper. The daily tasks of any given family

essentially look like that of the next family, and so on. There is little or no division of labor and

people are linked to each other only through similar beliefs, and do not depend on one another

for subsistence. Durkheim claims that primitive societies have a stronger common consciousness

because they all do alike things and consequently have more mutual understandings, norms, and

beliefs. In a sense, they belong to society, not to themselves. An example of a mechanical society

is tribal societies.

1.1(b) Organic Solidarity

A modern society is characterized by organic solidarity. As society develops and

becomes less primitive, it moves towards organic solidarity. Organic solidarity does not come

from the collective conscience, but rather, from the division of labor. In this type of society,

people are dependent on others and what they produce to survive. They are not like people in

primitive societies who are basically self-sufficient. Instead, they need to rely on many others,

such as the grocer, baker, butcher, mechanic, teacher, guard and so forth. This interdependence

causes not only more solidarity, but also a more evident moral character, wherein individuals feel

responsible for one another. It is the differences among the people that held together this type of

society. Organic solidarity is possible only when individuals are specialized and different.

3

This chart help show the emphasis of individual and common in past and present societies.

(Individual, https://wiki.uchicago.edu/display/powerpedia/Individual)

To measure the decline in mechanical solidarity, Durkheim has explored the law system

in both the traditional and modern societies.

1.2 Types of Laws

Durkheim believed that social life takes a specific and structured form and the best indicator

of this organization is law. He identifies two types of law:

a) Repressive Law

b) Restitutive Law

1.2(a) Repressive Law

In these early societies, Durkheim argues that legal codes or the system of law tends to be

repressive law or penal law. The goal of repressive law is to punish the individual. Repressive

law, which centers on punishment, is diffused all through a whole society, imbedded in the

conscience collective, and reflects the morals of the society. This type of society does not have a

very developed judicial institution because it reacts collectively when there is a crime. Most

4

people feel the offense, and regardless of how serious it is, severe punishment is likely to be

meted out for it. Penal law involves sanctions only, and there is no mention of obligations.

Punishment is harsh, maybe death or dismemberment. Moral obligation and duty is not stated in

the punishment, because