Question(s):
So, what are your reactions to Durkheim? Any concepts that resonate with you — or, are there any that seem way off base? Why is social cohesion such a theme in 19th-century social theory?

Answer Reference(s):
Edles, Laura Desfor, and Scott Appelrouth. 2010. Sociological Theory in the Classical Era. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press. pgs. 94 – 122 and pages 134 – 152.
This reading will cover a biographical and introductory sketch of Durkheim as well as excerpts from The Division of Labor, The Rules of the Sociological Method, and some introductory notes on Suicide. It will also include introductory remarks on and excerpts from The Elementary Forms of Religious Life.

Alan Macfarlane on Emile Durkheim:
https://youtu.be/IfjycYvlZGg

Durkheim and Social Solidarity:
https://youtu.be/3VwoihGP_i8

NOTE(s):
Durkheim’s Division of Labor is a seminal work; more than a century after publication it remains one of the most important works in sociology. Not bad for a doctoral dissertation! In the Division of Labor, Durkheim opts for evolutionary theory to explain the development of modern society. His approach is more deeply rooted in biology than that of Karl Marx and draws upon concepts such as carrying capacity to explain sociological transitions.

As you know from your reading, Durkheim saw a man moving across an evolutionary arc from primitive to modern society. Each stage developed social structures suited to the environment (natural and human) in which it was rooted. Mechanical solidarity a sort of shared worldview was the glue that held more primitive societies together. If you see shades of asabiyyah in this concept, you are not hallucinating. There are indeed similarities in the two concepts. Durkheim was influenced by the work of the French philosophers Montesquieu and Rousseau both of whom addressed the concept of collective consciousness. There is strong evidence that Rousseau was familiar with the work of Ibn Khaldun, and Montesquieu probably was as well. That is not to say that Durkheim was simply lifting an idea from Khaldun with whom he may or may not have been familiar with. Rather, powerful concepts tend to pass from scholar to scholar being modified to fit their understanding of the world around them.

A chief difference between Khaldun and Durkheim, however, was that the former worked from a cyclical paradigm and the latter from an evolutionary one. Khaldoun saw asabiyyah weakening across the generations until a new tribe with strong asabiyyah conquered the existing elites, and then the cycle inevitably repeated itself. Durkheim saw a brilliant alternative. Societies adapted and grew more complex as their environment changed, progressing toward modern societies where mechanical solidarity was replaced by organic solidarity in which mutual dependence was the glue that held it all together. Thus, the fundamental structure and shape of society change. It is an incredibly modern turn, and it is all laid out in the pages of The Division of Labor.

Anomie: Durkheim also believed society could malfunction and become pathological. In his studies of the world around him, Durkheim saw the impact of rapid urbanization and modernization. The cities of Europe were growing at a rapid pace; people were often left feeling adrift and unmoored, resulting in anomie. These views were not merely the product of idle speculation on his part. He is an exemplar of applied sociology who was actively engaged in the practice of sociology with works like Suicide. He was seeing and studying a world transformed before his eyes and eventually was watching it slide into World War I, a horrible conflict that would claim the life of his son.

Religion: Even though Durkheim never followed the rabbinical tradition of his family, he remained fascinated by the impact of religion on society. His work on religion is astounding, and even if you ultimately disagree with some of his conclusions you cant help but be overwhelmed by the brilliance of the work. Here is a guy who was a positivist to the core grappling with metaphysical mysteries and the ways in which our understanding of them both shapes and is shaped by our social world.

All in all, Durkheim leaves a heckuva legacy. Hard to imagine what the discipline would be like without him.

Well, for one thing, it must have appeared that society was coming apart at the seams during this period. We sometimes forget that the industrial revolution was just that, a revolution in the way people lived that was brought about by advances in technology.

One of the most dramatic of those changes was the rapid growth of cities. In 1800 the population of Paris was about 547,000 people, and the city covered about 13 square miles. By 1900, the population was 2.7 million, and the city sprawled across about 45 square miles. Much of that population explosion occurred within Durkheim’s own lifetime. At the time of his birth in 1858, Paris had about 1.6 million people; when he died, the population was approaching 2.9 million.

Other cities across Europe experienced similar surges in urbanization as people poured in from the countryside to work in factories and in the service businesses needed to support these urban centers. These folks often found themselves adrift in the big city without the structured existence of village or farm life to guide them. Custom and convention gave way to the demands of modern industrial society. For example, their daily life was structured by the factory clock rather than the rising or setting of the sun or the demands of the season.

With this increased population density came social problems like crime, prostitution, and alcohol and drug use. And people down on their luck often realized they lacked their old social network of kinfolk to whom they could turn for immediate help.

Placed in this context, it is clear that in his work Durkheim is struggling to make sense of — and perhaps find solutions for — the social problems of his day. His interest in social solidarity and anomie is not a purely academic exercise, but an attempt to address very real concerns

Reference(s):
Edles, Laura D. and Scott Appelrouth. 2010. Sociological Theory in the Classical Era. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

Grenfell, Michael James (ed). 2012. Pierre Bourdieu: Key Concepts. New York: Routledge.

Alan Macfarlane on Emile Durkheim:
https://youtu.be/IfjycYvlZGg

Durkheim and Social Solidarity:
https://youtu.be/3VwoihGP_i8

Scott, John. 2014. A Dictionary of Sociology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.