PUNJAB, PATIALA
Emile Durkhiem :
A Critical Appraisal
This project is purely based on the bonafide research work carried out under the
guidance and supervision of Ms. Jasleen Kewlani and the same has not been submitted
anywhere for any purposes whatsoever.
Ankita Mittal
Debarati Dey
Prakhar Deep
Anshul Gupta
Group V Page 2
Theory of Emile Durkheim: A Critical Appraisal
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We take this opportunity to express our humble gratitude and personal regards to
Dr. Jasleen Kewlani for inspiring us and guiding us during the course of this project
work. We also extend our sincere thanks to our parents and friends for the inspiration and
guidance given to us from time to time during the progress of this project work. And we
also want to extend our regards to the library staff of our university as without their help
this project was not possible.
Ankita Mittal
Debarati Dey
Prakhar Deep
Anshul Gupta
Group V Page 3
Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.............................................................3
Table of Contents.................................................................. 4
CHAPTER 1...........................................................................5
INTRODUCTION.....................................................................5
CHAPTER 2...........................................................................7
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY.................................................7
CHAPTER 3...........................................................................8
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY....................................................8
CHAPTER 4...........................................................................9
PROBLEMS FACED.................................................................9
.......................................................................................... 10
CHAPTER 5.......................................................................... 11
THEORIES...........................................................................11
THEORY OF SOCIAL FACTS.........................................................11
THEORY OF DIVISION OF LABOUR...............................................14
THEORY AND TYPOLOGY OF SUICIDE..........................................18
THE ELEMENTARY FORMS OF RELIGIOUS LIFE .............................24
CHAPTER 6.......................................................................... 27
CONCLUSION....................................................................... 27
Group V Page 4
Theory of Emile Durkheim: A Critical Appraisal
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
(The Division of Labor in Society), in its original French language form, in which
he introduced the concept of "anomie". The Division of Labor in Society is one of the
four most important of Durkheim's works which also include, "Les Règles de la méthode
sociologique" (The Rules of Sociological Method), Le Suicide: étude de sociologie"
(Suicide: A Study in Sociology), and "Les Formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse" (The
Elementary Forms of the Religious Life).2
Durkheim was a tireless worker- a ‘workaholic’ before the term was invented. In
the course of his career he thought a variety of courses, founded a research institute,
founded and edited what probably was the first journal of sociology, trained a generation
of graduate students, and produced a large body of literature. In his fifty-nine years,
Durkheim did more than anyone else to institutionalize sociology. In pursuing his larger
goal of reforming modern society along lines that be thought were both morally
progressive and necessary, he had no success. Many of the social problems and
conditions that he viewed as “pathological” are still with us today; the solution of
“corporatism” he offered to them seems at best quaint and has no adherents.
Durkheim was actively concerned with French politics throughout his life. He was
1
www.emile-durkheim.com/
2
id
Group V Page 5
respected as a political liberalist. The most prominent area of his interest was moral
education. He was particularly concerned to discover values and moral principles that
would guide French education. Durkheim had evinced interest in socialism. His
conception of socialism was markedly different from that of Marxian socialism.
Durkheim labeled Marxism as a set of “disputable and out-of-date hypotheses.”3 He did
not see the proletariat as the salvation of society, and he was greatly opposed to agitation
or violence.
Though Durkheim is no more, functionalism, sociology of education, sociology of
law, sociology of religion etc. started by him, are still alive.
3
Lukes as quoted by George Ritzer in “Contemporary Sociological Theory” 2nd Edition. Page 81.
Group V Page 6
Theory of Emile Durkheim: A Critical Appraisal
CHAPTER 2
Group V Page 7
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Group V Page 8
Theory of Emile Durkheim: A Critical Appraisal
CHAPTER 4
PROBLEMS FACED
We did not face too much problem while preparing this project. Though at some point of
time there were some problems in context to coordination of group mates. A major
problem which we faced in our project is limitations of our research. Since our college is
not subscribed to crucial journal database such as JSTOR and SSRN, our research was
only confined to books available in our university. If we had access to these databases we
would have easily researched through latest papers about theories of Emile Durkheim.
Group V Page 9
Group V Page 10
Theory of Emile Durkheim: A Critical Appraisal
CHAPTER 5
THEORIES
Main Intentions of the “Theory of Social Facts”: Durkheim was in part a positivist and
a believer in applying the methods of physical sciences to the study of social facts.
Durkheim conception of sociology is based on a theory of social fact. Durkheim’s aim is
to demonstrate that there is a science called “sociology” which is an objective science
conforming to the model of the other sciences and whose subject is the social fact.
4
durkheim.itgo.com/main.html
Group V Page 11
control him.”5
Durkheim has emphatically stated that society is a reality “sui generis” above
and apart from the individuals. He provides four evidences in defence of this
5
principles of sociology with an introduction to social thought, c.n. Shankar Rao, S.Chand & Company Ltd., 6th
edition, 2007, page 698
6
id
7
Durkheim in his “Rules of Sociological Method” page- 102.
Group V Page 12
Theory of Emile Durkheim: A Critical Appraisal
assertion.
I. Heterogeneity of individual and collective states of mind: Durkheim says that
there is a difference in the states of mind of an individual and a group. Ex. In
times of national danger the intensity of the collective feeling of patriotism is
much greater than that of any individual feeling. Further, society’s willingness
to sacrifice individuals is much greater than the willingness of individuals to
sacrifice themselves. 8
II. Difference in individual attitudes and behaviour which results from the group
situation: Individual, for example thinks, feels, and acts in a different fashion
when in a crowd. This means that a new reality is created by the association of
individuals and this reality reacts upon the sentiments and behaviour of the
individual. It can even change them.9
III. Uniformities of Social Statistics: Many types of social facts like crimes,
marriages, suicides, etc., show a surprising degree of numerical consistency
from year to year. This consistency cannot be explained from personal motives.
According to Durkheim, this could be explained only in terms of “certain real
social currents which form a part of the individual’s environment”.10
IV. The fourth evidence is based on analogy and on philosophical theory of
emergence: Just as a phenomenon of life cannot be explained by physio-
chemical properties of the molecules which forms a cell, but by a particular
association of molecules, so also we must assume that society is not reducible to
the properties of individual minds. On the contrary, society constitutes reality
“sui generis” which emerges out of the interaction of individual minds.11
b. Social Facts Exercise Constraints on the Individuals
According to Durkheim, social facts have constraining effect on
individual. Social facts so condition human beings that it makes them behave in a
particular manner. Durkheim uses series of examples such as, moral laws, legal
rules, panel system and the crowd behaviour in support of this view. Examples:
8
principles of sociology with an introduction to social thought, c.n. Shankar Rao, S.Chand & Company Ltd., 6th
edition, 2007, page 699
9
id
10
id
11
id
Group V Page 13
I. In a crowd situation an individual feels constrained to behave in a particular
manner. Laughter, for example, is communicated to all. Such a phenomenon is
a social because, its basis, its subject is the group as a whole and not the
society.
II. Social facts are belief systems, customs and institutions e.g. education. They
are chosen by individuals and cannot be changed at will. A social fact
continues to exist because it is useful to society.
CRITICAL APPRAISAL
1. According to L.A. Coser, Durkheim’ Theory of Social Facts completely ignores
the importance of the individual and places too much premium on society.
2. Durkheim’s attempts to analyse and study “Social facts as things” is criticized by
H.E.Barnes. He says that Durkheim has not made it clear anywhere as to what he
means by the term “things” in the context of social facts. The term has a vague
connotation. It could mean a lot many other things to other people, doubting the
validity of the theory.
3. Durkheim recommended indirect experiment that is, the comparative method as
the only appropriate method suited to study social-phenomenon. He made
comparative sociology not a branch of sociology but sociology.
4. Gabriel Tarde criticizes that it is difficult to imagine and apprciate Durkheimian
analysis of society bereft of individuals.
Group V Page 14
Theory of Emile Durkheim: A Critical Appraisal
In this earlier work Durkheim stated that a society with organic solidarity needed
fewer common beliefs to bind members to the society. But later he changed his view and
stressed that even the societies in which organic solidarity has reached its peak, needed a
common faith, a “common conscience collective.” This would help the men to remain
united and not to “disintegrate into a heap of mutually antagonistic and self-seeking
individuals.”
Division of labor, though an essential element of society can do great harm to the
society if carried to the extreme. Durkheim was quite aware of this and hence had
cautioned against the adverse consequences of unregulated division of labor. “Anomie” is
one such adverse consequence. In fact, Durkheim was the first to use this concept.
15
Collins Dictionary of Sociology. Page 621
16
Dictionary of Sociology, W.P. Scott, page 406.
Group V Page 16
Theory of Emile Durkheim: A Critical Appraisal
“Anomie is the strict counterpart of the idea of social solidarity. Just as solidarity
is a state of collective ideological integration, anomie is a state of confusion, insecurity,
normlessness. The collective representations are in a state of decay.”
The essential problem of modern society, Durkheim argued, is that the division of
labor leads inevitably to feelings of individualism, which can be achieved only at the cost
of shared sentiments or beliefs. The result of anomie is- a state of normlessness in both
the society and the individual. Social norms become confused or break down, and people
feel detached from their fellow beings. Having little commitment to shared norms, people
lack social guidelines for personal conduct and are inclined to pursue their private interest
without regard for the interests of society as a whole. Social control of individual
behavior becomes ineffective, and as a result the society is threatened with
disorganization or even disintegration.
Durkheim was probably correct in his view that the division of labor and the resulting
growth of individualism would break down shared commitment to social norms, and it
seems plausible that there is widespread anomie in modern societies. Yet these societies
do retain some broad consensus on norms and values, as we can readily see when we
compare one society with another, say, the United Sates with China. Although this
consensus seems much weaker than that in preindustrial societies, it is probably still
strong enough to guide most individual behavior and to avert the social breakdown that
Durkheim feared. Durkheim’s analysis remains valuable, however, for his acute insights
into the far-ranging effects that the division of labor has on social and personal life.
Concluding Remarks
According to Raymond Aron, the philosophical idea which underlies the theory of
“division of labor” could be summed up like this: “the individual is the expression of the
collectivity itself.. It is the structure of the collectivity that imposes on each man his
Group V Page 17
peculiar responsibility.” Even in the society which authorizes each man to be himself and
know himself, there is more collective consciousness present in the individual
consciousness than we imagine.” Collective imperatives and prohibitions, collective
values and things held sacred are needed to bind individuals to the social entity. Hence
Durkheim felt that only if all members of a society were tied to a common set of
symbolic representations or to common set of beliefs about the world around them, the
moral unity of the society would be safe. “Without them, Durkheim argued, any society,
whether primitive or modern, was bound to degenerate and decay.”
Definition of Suicide
According to Durkheim, suicide refers to “every case of death resulting directly or
indirectly from a positive or negative death performed by the victim himself and which
strives to produce this result.”
It is clear from the definition of Durkheim that suicide is a conscious act and the
person concerned is fully aware of its consequences. The person who shoots himself to
death, or drinks severe poison, or jumps down from the 10th storey of a building, for
example, is fully aware of the consequences of such an act.
Group V Page 18
Theory of Emile Durkheim: A Critical Appraisal
(b) To support with empirical evidence his own sociological explanation of suicide.
Group V Page 19
Social Forces are the Real Causes of Suicide: Durkheim
Suicide is a highly individual act, yet the motives for a suicide can be fully
understood only by reference to the social context in which it occurs. In his attempts to
substantiate this fact he came to know that the incidence of suicide varied from one
special group or set up to another and did so in a consistent manner over the years.
Protestants were more likely to commit suicide than Catholics; people in large cities were
more likely to commit suicide than people in small communities; people living alone
were more likely to commit suicide than people living in families. Durkheim isolated one
independent variable that lay behind these differences: the extent to which the individual
was integrated into a social bond with others. People with fragile or weaker ties to their
community are more likely to take their own lives than people who have stronger ties.
(1) Egoistic suicide- which results from the lack of the integration of the individual into
his social group.
(2) Altruistic suicide- is a kind of suicide which results from the over-integration of the
individual into his social group.
(3) Anomic suicide- results from the state of normlessness or degeneration found in
society.
Having analyzed the above mentioned three types of suicide, Durkheim concludes
that “suicide is an individual phenomenon whose causes are essentially social.”
Durkheim has established the view that there are no societies in which suicide does
not occur. It means suicide may be considering as a “normal”, that is, a regular
occurrence. However, sudden increase in suicide rates may be witnessed. This, he said,
Group V Page 20
Theory of Emile Durkheim: A Critical Appraisal
could be taken as “an index of disintegrating forces at work in a social structure.” He also
came to the conclusion that different rates of suicide are the consequences of differences
in degree and type of social solidarity. Suicide is a kind of index to decay in social
solidarity.
2. As Abraham and Morgan have said “the larger significance of suicide lies in its
demonstration of the function of sociological theory in empirical science” [page-
114].
3. A successful attempt is made in this theory to establish logically the link between
social solidarity, social control and suicide.
4. Durkheim has thrown light on the various faces of suicide. He is, indeed, the first
person in this regard.
Critical Comments
1. Durkheim has given importance only to social factors in suicide. In doing so, he
has neglected the role of other factors, especially the psychological. Hence this is
a one-sided view.
2. The theory is based upon a very small sample of data concerning suicide.
Group V Page 21
On the basis of the analysis of a mass of data gathered by him on many societies and
cultures, Durkheim identified three basic types of suicides. They are followed:
1. Egoistic Suicide
Durkheim’s belief is that lack of integration of the individuals into the social
group is the main cause for egoistic suicide. Durkheim studied varying degrees of
integration of individuals into their religion, family, political and national communities.
He found that among the Catholicism is able to integrate its members more fully into its
fold. On the other hand, Protestantism fosters spirit of free inquiry, permits great
individual freedom, lacks hierarchic organizations and has fewer common beliefs and
practices. It is known that the Catholic Church is more powerfully integrated than the
Protestant church. It is in this way the Protestants are more prone to commit suicide than
the Catholics. Hence, Durkheim generalized that the lack of integration is the main cause
of egoistic suicide.
Group V Page 22
Theory of Emile Durkheim: A Critical Appraisal
2. Altruistic Suicide
This kind of suicide takes place in the form of a sacrifice in which an individual ends
his life by heroic means so as to promote a cause or an ideal which is very dear to him. It
results from the over integration of the individual into his group. In simple words,
altruistic suicide is taking off one’s own life for the sake of a cause. It means that even
high level of social solidarity includes suicide. Examples:
(1) In some primitive societies and in modern armies such suicide takes place.
(2) Japanese sometimes illustrate this type of suicide. They call it “Harakiri.” In this
practice of Harakiri, some Japanese go to the extent taking off their lives for the
sake of the larger social unity. They consider the self-destruction would prevent
the breakdown of social unity.
(3) The practice of “Sati” which was once in practice in North India is another
example of this kind.
Wherever altruistic suicide is prevalent, man is always ready to sacrifice his life for a
great cause, principle, ideal or value.
2. Anomic Suicide
The breakdown of social norms and sudden social changes that are characteristic of
modern times, encourage anomic suicide. When the collective conscience weakens, men
fall victim to anomic suicide. “Without the social backing to which one is accustomed,
life is judged to be not worth continuing.”
Anomic suicide is the type that follows catastrophic social changes. Social life all
around seems to go to pieces. According to Durkheim, at times when social relations get
disturbed both personal and social ethics become causalities. Values of life come down
and outlook of some persons changes radically. There are certain dangerous
developments in the society. A sudden change has its vibrations both in social life and
Group V Page 23
social relationship, when paves way for suicide. If the change is sudden, adjustment
becomes difficult and those who do not get adjusted to changes commit suicide. It is this
social disruption which leads to suicide. According to Durkheim, not only economic
disaster and industrial crisis but even sudden economic prosperity can cause disruption
and deregulation and finally suicide.
Concluding Remarks
Raymond Aron pointed out that Durkheim in his study of “suicide” has been successful
in establishing a social fact that there is “specific social phenomena which govern
individual phenomena. The most impressive, most eloquent example is that of the social
forces which drive individuals to their deaths, each believing that he is obeying only
himself.”
Durkheim one of the earliest functionalist theorists, was the first sociologist to
apply the functional approach to religion in a systematic way. His theory of religion got
its proper form in his famous book “The Elementary Forms of Religious life-1912.” It is
indeed, his significant contribution to the field of “Sociology of Religion.”
Durkheim in his study stressed the social role or functions of the simplest form of
religion called totemism of Australian Aborigines. The totem, denotes a common object
such as an animal, or a plant, and a symbol representing that it is sacred. Each tribal clan
Group V Page 24
Theory of Emile Durkheim: A Critical Appraisal
is organized around totem. The totem, then, is sacred but it is also the symbol of society
itself. From this fact Durkheim concluded that when people worship religion, they are
really worshipping nothing more than their own society: “divinity is merely society
transformed and symbolically conceived.”
When happens, Durkheim argued, is that members of the clan gather periodically.
They participate in some group functions with emotional excitement and feel great
ecstasy and elation of a kind which they would never feel alone. Now, the “Man know
well that they are acted upon, but they do not know by whom.” They pick on some
nearby item such s a plant or animal, and make this the symbol of both their clan
gathering (or subject) and their experience of favor and ecstasy (or religion). Their shared
religious belief arises from the society and, in turn, it helps to hold the society together”-
Robertson
The unity and solidarity of the community is further increased by the rituals that
are enacted on religious occasions. These rituals also have the capacity of bringing people
together and reaffirming the values and beliefs of the group. They also help to transmit
the cultural heritage from one generation to the next. The rituals maintain taboos and
prohibitions and those who violate them are punished. The disobedient or violators o
norms may even be required to undergo ritual punishment or purification. The rituals
have another function also. In times of individual distress or group crisis the rituals
provide help and comfort. “The social function of shared religious beliefs and the rituals
that go with them is so important. Durkheim argued, that every society needs a religion or
at least some belief system that serves the same function” –Ian Robertson
According to Durkheim, much of the social disorder in modern times is due to the
Group V Page 25
fact that people no longer believe deeply in religion and that they have found no
satisfying substitute for that. Lacking commitment to shared belief system, people tend to
pursue their private interests without regard to their follows.
Concluding remarks
It is true that much of Durkheim’s work on religion was purely speculative. His account
of the origins of religion could not be accepted by most of the modern sociologists.
Goldenweiser, for example, criticized Durkheim’s theory as one-sided and
psychologically untenable. He argued that a “society possessing the religious sentiment is
capable of accomplishing unusual things, but it can hardly produce that sentiment out of
itself.” Some others have stated that “by making the social mind, or collective
representations the sole source of religion, Durkheim resorted to something quite
mysterious in it and, hence failed to give a satisfactory explanation.” But the real merit of
his analysis is his recognition of the vital social functions that religion plays in society.
Group V Page 26
Theory of Emile Durkheim: A Critical Appraisal
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION
Group V Page 27
social has often made his critics brand him as a thinker with conservative bias
opposed to the creative functions of conflict. He, of course, found it impossible,
even in theory, to escape “the limits of the contemporary social life.”
6. Durkheim Gave Priority only to the Society and Not to the individual: he has
made “social facts” central in his methods. A social factor is a phase of behavior-
thinking, feeling or acting- which has a coercive nature. Social facts involve rules
and regulations, systems of procedure, and sets of customary beliefs. They have
super-individual value. It appears that in his treatment of social facts and
collective conscience. Durkheim almost completely neglected the social
importance of individual decision. “Society is real, to be sure, but so is the
individual and the two, it should be remembered, are always in interaction. Giving
priority to one or the other, is misleading in the long” –L.A.Cosser.
Group V Page 28
Theory of Emile Durkheim: A Critical Appraisal
BIBLIOGRAPHY
2. Anand, Navneet and Akhtar, Shamim Sociology Spectrum Books, New Delhi,
2007.
Group V Page 29