Social Science 2 | Instructor: Enrico V.

Gloria | Department of Political Science, UP Diliman | Second Sem 2019

Emile Durkheim

1. Emile Durkheim (1858-1917): Life and Times

o Academic Credentials: Emile Durkheim was born into a Jewish family with modest means in
Epinal, Lorraine, France. He obtained his Ph.D. from the École Normale Supériure in 1879. He also
obtained a one-year fellowship at the University of Berlin in 1885. It was however at the University
of Bordeaux where he got a university position at the age of 29. It is also at Bordeaux where he
wrote most of his important works including Division of labor in Society (1893), Rules of
Sociological Method (1895), and Suicide (1897). Ultimately, it was at Sorbonne University in Paris,
France where Durkheim built a name for himself as a renowned sociologist. Together with Max
Weber, Emile Durkheim is known as one of the fathers of modern sociological theory.

2. Sociology and Influence

o What is Sociology. Broadly speaking, the discipline of sociology refers to the scientific study of
societies, social interactions, and social relationships to explain either the current social order (status
quo), or social change. In comparison to political science, sociology tends to have a wider scope in
this sense as the former mostly focuses on political institutions and leaders, and more broadly, the
distribution of power. Durkheim’s contribution to the sociology has to do with his emphasis on
positivism. As opposed to mere philosophical speculation, positivism in the social sciences refers to
the use of the scientific method to analyze and understand the workings of a society.
o Anti-individualist trend. Durkheim’s ideas rest on the assumption that groups are more than the
sum of their parts, giving more emphasis on the explanatory power of the ‘structure’ (social facts,
society) over the ‘agent’ (individual). While individuals constitute society i.e. society won’t exist
without these ‘parts’, the explanation for how society works does not end here. Social facts (e.g.
institutions, values, norms, language, etc) have explanatory autonomy from the individual, and could
actually influence individual behavior itself.

3. Division of Labor
o Recap of Definitions/Perspectives. Durkheim provides a sociological perspective to understanding
division of labor (DOL) in society. As we may recall, Adam Smith described DOL as simply the
breaking down of production processes to simpler and more distinct operations with the effect of
“spreading universal opulence” across society. Karl Marx on the other hand also pertained to DOL in
explaining how history progressed, describing earlier societies to only be concerned with DOL
defined by simple cooperation, and then moving to complex cooperation at the stage of capitalism.
Under this complex DOL, the worker ultimately finds himself alienated from his work, thus the
impetus for social change, or the breaking down of capitalism ultimately towards communism.
o Sociological Definition. Provided by Durkheim in his understanding of what DOL stands for, he
emphasized social cohesion as a product of a society whose individuals are defined by their separate
and specialized occupational functions under DOL. In coming up with this understanding of DOL,
Durkheim was trying to explain why we can observe high levels of individualism i.e. emphasizing
rights of individuals, while at the same time observing high levels of solidarity i.e. nationalism and
unity, under a condition of more and more specialized DOL under industrialization. This ‘puzzle’
becomes more relevant once we consider the view of Marx emphasizing the alienation of the worker
i.e. which will eventually lead to progress towards communism, as DOL becomes more complex in
his own version of understanding DOL. Therefore, Durkheim simply explains that as division of
labor develops i.e. becomes more specialized under industrial societies, we may also expect the
transformation of social solidarity to one that is more organic or natural (greater solidarity).
o What causes DOL. For Smith, human wisdom and man’s interest to exchange things with fellow
human beings are the primary drivers for DOL in society. For Durkheim however, he refers to
increased interaction within society which primarily led to DOL. Specifically, he refers to (1) closer
 Social Science 2 | Instructor: Enrico V. Gloria | Department of Political Science, UP Diliman | Second Sem 2019

geographical proximity, (2) formation of cities, and (3) frequent communication as necessary factors
for DOL to proceed within a society.
o Mechanical vs. Organic Solidarity. Durkheim posits that as DOL in society develops to one that is
more specialized (think industrialization), we are also transforming social solidarity towards an
organic kind where high individualism and high solidarity goes hand-in-hand. Both are not in
competition with one another as other thinkers (Marx for instance) tend to argue. Below is a table
showing how society progresses in terms of changes in solidarity based on certain factors
(population, DOL, self, and social relations).

Mechanical Solidarity Organic Solidarity

Society traditional, primitive societies modern, industrial societies
Population small and isolated homogenous population large populations spread over broad geographic
areas
Division of simply based on social cooperation, no increased complexity and increased
Labor specialization specialization of tasks
Self low degree of autonomy and individualism the self is defined by occupation, enjoy rights
and freedoms protected by law
Social a system of social relations defined by a system of social relations defined by contract
Relations common beliefs, customs, obligations binding individuals together

o Division of Labor and Greater Solidarity. How does DOL lead to high solidarity (organic)? With
DOL, society achieves (1) high population and material density, and (2) high level of
industrialization. These conditions create an interdependent society where each specialized function
of any individual is considered vital for the efficient functioning of the society, hence the necessity
for high solidarity.

4. Collective Conscience
o What it refers to. Another concept related to Durkheim’s ideas with respect to solidarity and
division of labor is Collective Conscience. It simply refers to a system of beliefs and sentiments held
in common by the members of a society, which also defines what their mutual relations look like. A
certain level of collective conscience can be found in societies characterized by either mechanical or
organic solidarity. Simply put, collective conscience is a ‘glue’ that binds society together.
Moreover, Durkheim observes that in a society characterized by organic solidarity, we find
individuals no longer wholly enveloped by collective conscience. Rather, advanced societies are
populated by individuals with greater personality and independence which serves to strengthen
solidarity through a more specialized DOL.
o Its Four Characteristics. To be more specific, the degree of collective conscience is influenced by
the following factors:
o Volume: this refers to the persuasiveness of collective beliefs and their intrusiveness in our
lives and attitudes.
o Intensity: this refers to the extent of collective conscience’s influence over members of a
given society.
o Determinateness: this refers to how willingly the collective consciousness would give way to
change in its own make up (e.g. beliefs, norms, values, etc.)
o Content: this refers to the dominant characteristic of society, and this can be further
differentiated to (a) religious content, and (b) secular content.