Emile Durkheim, the Father of Sociology Essay

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.

Pope and Johnson (1983) state that Durkheim proposed that society revitalizes individuals and gives them strength to persevere in the face of the vicissitudes of everyday life. Stones (2008), further states that Durkheim felt that we acquired all the best in ourselves and all the things that distinguish us from other animals from our social existence. Thought, language, world-views, rationality, morality and aspirations are derived from society. Thus, the unsocialised individual, the individual divorced form society, the beast within us, is a poor approximation of the highly socialised beings that constitute societies.

"Suicide, what a terrible concept. There are two types of suicide: physical, and theoretical. Physical suicide is the more commonly heard type of suicide. It entails the person actually, physically killing himself or herself. On the other hand, theoretical suicide is when the person does something that will, in turn, get him or her killed. For example, in “All About Suicide” by Luisa Valenzuela, Ismael, a man that works at a minister’s office, murders the minister, a high-ranking public official. Ismael has been forced to be quiet by the government; therefore he lashes out by killing the minister so that he can reveal the truth about the government. In doing this, Ismael technically “kills himself” because he knows the government

Please describe the impact Marx, Durkheim, & Weber had on sociology as prominent contributors of the discipline.

Egoistic suicide which is when individuals are not integrated well enough into society for example people who live alone compared to those who live with family. Secondly Altruistic suicide which is when individuals are felt to be too integrated into society causing suicide, for example members of the armed forces were said to have greater suicide rates than civilian personnel as they were too strongly integrated into a united body. Durkheim also put forward the idea of Anomic suicide, this is when the norms and values in society become unclear or confused in times of great social change and an individual is not taught to adapt to changes well enough. For example an unexpected death of a family member is sudden social change which can cause Anomic suicide. Lastly, he suggested Fatalistic suicide. Fatalism is the excessive amount of regulation which leads to one committing suicide.

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

Before discussing the social factors that affect suicide rates, Durkheim attempted to narrow down the ideas behind the reasoning of individual suicides and the level of suicide rates. One proposal to explain the suicide rate was the environment, such as the climate or conditions. Durkheim agreed, after analysing Europe that the suicide rate

Emile Durkheim was French sociologist. He was born on April 15, 1858 in Epinal, France. Epinal is located in the Eastern French Province, Lorraine. His father, Moise was the Chief Rabbi of Epinal, Vosges, and Haute-Marne, while his mother, Melanie, worked as an embroiderer. Durkheim was the youngest of their four surviving children.

Hamlet's to be or not to be soliloquy, illuminates something that crosses every human's mind, even if only for a split second; to live or die, fight or cry. Sometimes the world can get to a person, and when allowed to manifest, it can be hurtful. Suicide is a choice when things get tough, but a cowardly act. Life is precious and the only way to succeed must be to be in it; therefore, living. Suicide doesn't terminate a problem, but hides it. People will be judged sooner or later by the powers that be.

Suicide is the demonstration of deliberately consummation one's own particular life. The way societies view suicide differs generally as indicated by culture and religion. For instance, numerous Western societies, and in addition standard Judaism, Islam, and Christianity tend to view killing oneself as entirely negative (Edwards-Dryden, 2016). One myth about suicide that might be the consequence of this perspective is thinking about suicide (self-destructive ideation) to dependably be the aftereffect of a dysfunctional behavior. A few societies additionally regard a suicide endeavor as though it were a crime. Be that as it may, suicides are once in a while seen as justifiable or even good in specific circumstances, such as, in protest in persecution (for example, a hunger strike), as part of battle or resistance (for

Along with Marx and Weber, Durkheim is considered one of the founding members of modern sociology. He is also credited with making sociology a science through his application of scientific and empirical research. Durkheim believed that sociology should be seen as a science separate from other sciences such as psychology, by studying “social facts” objectively as things. (Kiviston, 2011)

On a social issue such as suicide, cultures differ because many people feel this is a personal problem whereas others feel that this can be a public issue. If a person commits suicide, it may have been as a result of his or her personal problems. In a larger society, this suicide is a public issue because the person who committed suicide is not the only one that may be affected. Sociologist Emile Durkheim perspective of suicide was that the issue was related to

Hamlet also treats suicide from a religious point, which he exposes the differences between his Catholic view to a more Protestant view. In Shakespeare’s time, everyone knew that pursuing suicide was a mortal sin, in which you’d be condemned to Hell. Hamlet has the inability to act upon his suicidal thoughts because suicide can control when people die, which Catholics believe in an eternal life and not one where people can control when they die. “To die, to sleep. To sleep, perchance to dream-ay, there’s the rub, for in that sleep of death

Some of his major works include The Division of Labour in Society (1893), The Rules of

Suicide, to Durkheim, is “an exaggerated form of ordinary practices,” and they arise from “comparable states of mind” in people, with the only difference between daily and suicidal behavior being the “chance of death” (Durkheim 20-21). Durkheim spends the majority of the work dissecting the “apparent motives” for suicide (Durkheim 151) and observing the varieties of suicide, a feat made difficult by the inaccurate reporting and misunderstandings of investigators. Thus, to understand the types of suicide, we must “reverse the order of our research” for “There can only be as many different types of suicide as there are differences in the causes from which they derive,” (Durkheim 149). He says “if they were all found to have the same essential characteristics, they would be grouped in one class” but “observations that we would need to have are more or less impossible obtain” (Durkheim