Karl Marx Vs Emile Durkheim

Disney movies have been the leading outlets for child education and social learning. Due to such power of influence controversies have been raised which include the following, but not limited to, gender roles and stereotypes, issues of independence, and misrepresentation. Many people argue that despite the morals and messages that occur within such films there are still underlying messages that deal with beauty standards and norms. However, others may argue that Disney is evolutionary and evolved the imagery of male/female standards. The controversy then becomes: are Disney films doing more harm than they are good? Due to certain themes brought on by such movies, it has left younger audiences with both positive and

Emile Durkheim believed that society was and is fundamentally a moral system. At the center of his social theory Durkheim placed law. He believed law played two important roles “it is the best and most objective single indicator of collective morality… law operates in society to constrain individual behavior and produce social order” (Sutton 32). To put it in simpler terms he believed that law could

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.

In those works, Durkheim argued that crime and deviance is “an integral part of all healthy societies”. He reasoned that crime and deviance are not only inevitable, but also functional for society and that they will only be considered dysfunctional when they

Furthermore Durkheim doesn’t specify how much crime is good for society before we fall into anomie. New Right sociologists such as Murray would be critical of this as they believe that subcultures which carry out criminal and deviant acts form an underclass which threatens society on the whole rather than strengthening ‘boundary maintenence.However Durkheim doesn’t state why people commit crimes, another functionalist who did was Merton.

Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim, and Max Weber were three historical sociologists. Their views have become world renown and have shaped many ways of interpreting the social structure of many modern societies. This essay will take a glimpse into the three sociologists’ ideals and expose the similarities and differences they may have.

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.

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

There were also 2 other theories that attempted to explain this “dualism of human nature” : (1) The Ontological Explanation by Plato- man’s inward struggle consists of being “good” and being unethical. Plato says that “because we are part of both, we are necessarily in conflict with ourselves.” (p.4) And a theory by Kant (2) Sensitivity and Reason- we have an ability to think individually or collectively. Durkheim feels that these 2 theories only re-state the problem it does not resolve it. They also assume that man’s nature is above explanation, but we should be able to explain it.

There are many ways humans can recognize differences amongst themselves, some of the most notable are race, religion, gender, and politics. Many people view these issues as barriers in forming relationships. However, there is another main reason for these complications that is usually overlooked, that is socioeconomic status. Socioeconomic class can put many divisions between us, this is largely seen in iconic pieces of literature, which also express many ways to overcome the issue.

Mantsios, G. (1998). Media Magic: Making Class Invisible. Race, class, and gender in the United

Crime can not be removed completely from society because it will always be the necessary unacceptable norm that can be located in all forms of societies around the world. Crime is regarded, by many people such as politicians and other people of everyday society, as horrid and unnecessary. Emile Durkheim believes that crime is normal and it isn't possible for it to not exist. If crime is everywhere and in no area has crime ever been successfully eradicated then we should assume it is there for a reason. According to many books written by Emile Durkheim, such as Suicide, and The Division of Labor, society plays a large role in our actions and Durkheim explains that reasons to which why crime is executable. Experts in the Department of

perpetuated over the years throughout Disney’s movies. Disney is one of the largest media companies in the world. According to Forbes, the “net worth and market capitalization of Disney Company has been estimated as $103.96 billion in 2013” ("Walt Disney Company Net Worth - Celebrity Net Worth,”). From the premiere of the Steamboat Willie cartoons in 1928 Disney has transformed pop culture as we know it today. This paper is designed to look into four major issues gender identity, gender roles, ethnicity, social class throughout Disney’s Cinderella (1950) and Frozen (2013). I aim to show that in these films can be found a subtle manual for social norms, a supplier of dominant family values. I will assess certain sociological concepts that are represented in these films namely ‘The American Dream’, standardization, pseudo-individualism and the creation of false needs. As a society, the understanding of these issues are instrumental to our being since our identity is often distorted through long term norms, ideals and merits set forth through these animated films.

After determining what resulted from modernization, Durkheim unlike Marx was interested in reforming not eliminating modern society. In analyzing Durkheim’s theory of modern society, I will begin with the focal point of it, namely solidarity.

Another interesting argument that Durkheim makes is that societies cannot function without crime. I believe this also ties into the topic in the previous paragraph; defining and punishing crime helps societies reinforce collective morality. How would one reinforce that if there were no crime at all? Of course we as human beings might know something is wrong but will do it anyways because no one has ever gotten caught doing it before. Yet, if someone has been punished for the crime we are about to commit we are less likely to do it, hence the term deterrence. “The student, Dharun Ravi, had sent out Twitter and text messages encouraging others to watch. His roommate, Tyler Clementi, jumped to his death from the George Washington Bridge three