Social Facts
Biographical sketch of Emile Durkheim (1858-1917)
Early Life and Education
Born in Epinal, France.
Descended from a lineage of devout French Jews, with multiple generations of rabbis in his family.
Education
Initially enrolled in a rabbinical school.
Later shifted to secular education, opting for a non-indoctrinate approach to studying religion.
Entered École Normale Supérieure (ENS) in 1879, marking his formal academic journey.
Career and Academic Journey
Early Academic Interests
Developed an interest in a scientific approach to studying society early in his career.
Faced opposition within the French academic system due to the absence of social science curriculum.
Transitioned focus from psychology and philosophy to ethics and ultimately sociology.
Teaching Career
Graduated with a degree in philosophy in 1882.
Taught philosophy at provincial schools from 1882 to 1887.
Traveled to Germany in 1885 to study sociology for two years, influencing his academic direction.
Returned to France and gained recognition, securing a teaching position at the University of Bordeaux in 1887.
Married Louise Dreyfus in the same year, subsequently having two children.
Major Works and Contributions
1893: The Division of Labour in Society
Introduced the concept of "anomie," exploring the breakdown of social norms' influence on individuals.
1895: The Rules of Sociological Method
Manifesto defining sociology and its methodological approach.
1897: Suicide: A Study in Sociology
Analyzed suicide rates among Protestants and Catholics, arguing that stronger social control reduces suicide rates.
1912: The Elementary Forms of The Religious Life
Analyzed religion as a social phenomenon, marking a culmination of his scholarly contributions.
Influence Of Predecessors on Emile Durkheim
1.Auguste Comte
Positivist Approach to Sociology
Comte advocated for sociology to be approached as a positive science, akin to the natural sciences, with observable social facts.
Durkheim embraced Comte's positivist viewpoint, emphasizing the empirical study of social facts.
This is reflected in Durkheim's statement to "consider 'social facts as things,'" indicating his commitment to studying social phenomena objectively, much like physical objects.
2. Utilitarian Positivists
Focus on Individual and Utility
Utilitarian positivists, primarily economists, viewed society as composed of individuals, each contributing through their utility to the social system.
They emphasized individual actions and their consequences within society.
Durkheim diverged from this perspective, critiquing the reduction of society to the sum of individual actions and their utilities.
Rejecting Individualism
Durkheim rejected the utilitarian positivist focus on individual utility and instead emphasized the importance of collective conscience and social facts.
He argued that individuals are shaped by social forces and institutions, and society transcends the sum of its individual parts.
Durkheim's positivism was self-structured in the sense that he maintained a scientific approach to sociology while placing society itself, as a collective entity with its own reality and influence, at the center of his analysis.
Emile Durkheim's intellectual development was significantly shaped by his predecessors, particularly Auguste Comte and the critiques of utilitarian positivism. His adoption of a positivist approach in sociology aligned with Comte's vision of applying scientific methods to social phenomena. However, Durkheim departed from the utilitarian perspective by asserting the primacy of society over the individual, emphasizing social facts and collective conscience as central to understanding society. This distinctive approach laid the foundation for Durkheim's enduring contributions to sociological theory and methodology.
Critique of Individualism
Emile Durkheim's critique of individualism was multifaceted, challenging its political, philosophical, and methodological implications. Here's an exploration of Durkheim's views on individualism:
Definition of Individualism
Emphasis on Individual Autonomy
Individualism, as Durkheim understood it, places supreme value on the distinctness and independence of individual human beings.
It advocates for individual freedom and autonomy, often viewing any subordination to collective authority as permissible only under limited and necessary circumstances.
Political and Philosophical Roots
Philosophically, individualism finds its roots in the political theories of thinkers like Thomas Hobbes and John Locke.
These theories discuss the relationship between individuals and society, particularly the state, asserting the rights and freedoms of individuals against undue collective control.
Methodological Implications
Methodologically, individualism suggests that social reality is reducible individual behaviour and motivation
It posits that understanding society involves understanding the general nature of individuals in aggregate—each individual's behaviors and motivations shaping collective outcomes.
For instance, in capitalist societies, individualism might attribute competitive behavior to innate human competitiveness and acquisitiveness.
Durkheim's Critique
Rejection of Reductionism
Durkheim rejected the reductionist view that society is merely an aggregation of individual behaviors and motivations.
He argued against the idea that societal phenomena can be adequately understood solely by studying individual actions, suggesting instead that society is sui-generis which possesses emergent properties that transcend individual behaviors.
Social Solidarity Durkheim emphasized that individuals are inherently social beings, shaped by social structures and collective conscience.
He viewed society not as a mere sum of individuals but as an entity with its own reality and forces that influence individual behavior.
Emile Durkheim's critique of individualism underscores his broader project to establish sociology as a rigorous social science. By challenging individualism's reductionist assumptions and emphasizing the importance of social facts and collective conscience, Durkheim aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of society. His work continues to influence sociological theory and methodology, emphasizing the interplay between individual agency and social structures in shaping human behavior and societal outcomes.
Nature And Scope Of Sociology According To Durkheim
Emile Durkheim's perspective on the nature and scope of sociology reflects his commitment to establishing sociology as a distinct social science, separate from philosophy yet utilizing scientific methods akin to the natural sciences.
Distinction from Philosophy
Concern with Objective Realities
Durkheim distinguishes sociology from philosophy by highlighting that while philosophy deals with ideas and conceptions, science—both natural and social—is concerned with objective realities.
He emphasizes that sociology, like other sciences, should focus on studying objective social facts rather than subjective interpretations.
Positivist Approach
Advocacy for Positivist Method
Durkheim advocates for a positivist approach to studying social phenomena, aligning with Auguste Comte's view of applying scientific methods to understand social realities.
This approach involves the systematic observation, measurement, and verification of social facts.
General Conditions for Social Science
Durkheim outlines several conditions that must be met for sociology to qualify as a valid social science:
1. Specific Subject Matter
Science, including sociology, deals with a specified area or subject matter of its own. It does not encompass total human knowledge or thought but focuses on observable phenomena.
Social facts are subject matter of sociology.
2. General Principles or Laws
The subject matter of sociology should yield general principles or laws that govern social phenomena.
Durkheim asserts that societies are subject to regularities, akin to natural laws, which can be discovered through empirical study.
How is a science of society possible
Emile Durkheim's perspective on how a science of society is possible revolves around establishing the existence of society as a legitimate subject matter for scientific inquiry.
Society as a Distinct Subject Matter
Distinct from Psychology
Initially, one might argue that psychology, the science of the individual mind, could encompass understanding human behavior without needing sociology.
Durkheim challenges this by asserting that society, though not directly observable like individuals, exists as a real and influential entity.
While individuals are tangible and observable, society is understood through its effects on individuals and collective behaviors.
Observable Effects
Durkheim acknowledges that society is not directly perceivable in the same way as physical objects, but insists it is observable through its effects on social phenomena.
He argues that despite its abstract nature, society causally impacts individual actions and collective outcomes.
Societal Reality
Existence as Natural Reality
Durkheim asserts that society is as much a reality as physical nature, albeit of a different character.
He posits that like physical phenomena, society adheres to certain rules and principles that can be observed and studied scientifically.
Criteria of Reality
In "The Rules of Sociological Method," Durkheim outlines criteria for establishing the reality of society.
He suggests that the criteria defining something as a reality apply broadly, encompassing both physical and social realities.
Durkheim's Strategy
Methodological Approach
Durkheim’s strategy involves demonstrating that society meets the criteria of reality through empirical observation and systematic analysis.
By identifying and studying social facts—patterns of behavior, norms, institutions—he aims to show that these are not merely aggregations of individual actions but constitute a distinct and observable reality.
Criteria for reality
Emile Durkheim proposed criteria for determining the reality of social phenomena, aligning them with broader philosophical concepts of what constitutes a reality.
Criteria for Reality According to Durkheim
1.External Existence
Durkheim asserts that to qualify as a reality, something must exist outside of individual consciousness. It should have an objective existence independent of individual perceptions.
Society, according to Durkheim, meets this criterion despite not being directly observable like physical objects.
While individuals are tangible and can be encountered in everyday life, society exists beyond individual consciousness and influences collective behavior and social structures.
2.Constraint on Action
Another criterion Durkheim identifies is that a reality must constrain human actions. This means its existence imposes limits or influences on what individuals can do.
Society constrains individuals' actions through social norms, laws, institutions, and collective expectations.
For example, societal norms and laws regulate behavior and prescribe acceptable conduct, thereby constraining individual actions within a societal framework.
Example: Comparison with a Brick Wall
Brick Wall as a Reality
A brick wall is a clear example of something that meets both criteria for reality:
It exists externally in the physical world, outside of individual consciousness.
It constrains human actions; attempting to walk through it will physically resist and impede movement.
Society as a Reality
Similarly, Durkheim argues that society satisfies these criteria:
Society exists beyond individual consciousness; it manifests through collective behaviors, institutions, and norms.
It constrains individual actions through social norms, laws, and expectations that regulate behavior and interaction.
Durkheim's Perspective
Durkheim's exploration of society as a reality aims to establish sociology as a legitimate scientific discipline. By applying these criteria, he seeks to demonstrate that social phenomena are not mere abstractions but have objective existence and influence on human behavior. This perspective underscores the importance of studying society as a complex system with its own dynamics and structures, separate from the sum of individual actions. Thus, Durkheim’s criteria for reality provide a philosophical and methodological foundation for understanding and researching social phenomena within sociology.
How can this assertion be justified?
The assertion that social facts meet the criteria of external existence and constraint on action, as argued by Durkheim, can be justified through the following points:
External Existence
Objective Existence Independent of Individual Consciousness
Social facts, such as laws, norms, institutions, and customs, are not products of individual invention but are collectively developed over time by societies.
For example, legal systems are codified and enforced by governments and institutions that predate and extend beyond any single individual’s existence.
These social facts confront individuals as external realities that exist independently of individual will or perception.
Justification: The existence of laws, for instance, is observable through their enforcement by authorities and their impact on societal behavior and norms. They are created through collective agreement and function independently of individual preferences or awareness.
Constraint on Action
Impact on Individual Behavior
Social facts constrain individual actions by setting norms, rules, and expectations that regulate behavior within a society.
Individuals must conform to these norms to avoid social sanctions or legal consequences.
For instance, laws regulate behaviors such as driving speed limits or financial transactions, and violating them can lead to penalties or imprisonment.
Justification: Individuals experience the constraints of social facts through their daily interactions and decisions. For example, complying with legal procedures to withdraw cash from a bank illustrates how laws structure and constrain individual actions.
Subjective Experience vs. Objective Constraint
While individuals may not always subjectively experience social constraints as resistance to their will (e.g., complying with laws out of habit or social norms), these constraints objectively define permissible behavior and limit individual freedom.
The threat of legal consequences for violating norms underscores the objective reality of social facts.
Justification: Even if individuals feel they are acting freely within societal norms, the existence of potential penalties for deviation demonstrates the objective constraint imposed by social facts. For instance, attempting to rob a bank illustrates how legal norms restrict actions and lead to consequences.
Emile Durkheim’s argument about the reality of social facts relies on demonstrating their external existence and their impact on individual actions. By highlighting how social norms and laws are collective products that objectively constrain behavior, Durkheim establishes that society operates according to rules and structures that go beyond individual preferences. This perspective supports the scientific study of sociology by providing a framework to analyze and understand how social forces shape human behavior and interaction within societies.
Social Boundries
Durkheim's concept of social unity and the boundaries of society revolves around several key ideas that differentiate a cohesive social entity from mere aggregation.
Necessity of Boundaries
Durkheim argues that for a society to exist, it must have identifiable boundaries that distinguish its members from non-members.
These boundaries are not geographical or physical but social and moral in nature. They define who belongs to the society and who does not.
Social Boundary
The boundary of a society is primarily social, based on membership criteria. It includes those who share common norms, values, and social practices.
For example, being French or English isn’t just about geography; it involves adherence to cultural norms and legal frameworks specific to each society.
Example: Nature of Crime
Illustrating Social Boundaries
Durkheim uses the concept of crime to illustrate how societies define their boundaries.
Crime represents behavior that violates societal norms and laws, thereby placing individuals outside the moral boundaries of acceptable conduct.
The response to crime, through legal sanctions and social exclusion, reinforces the moral and social boundaries of society.
Foundations of society
Durkheim's exploration of the foundations of society, particularly his critique of individualism and his concept of social solidarity, unfolds through several key points:
Rejection of Individualism and Contractual Foundation
1.Critique of Utilitarianism
Durkheim rejects the utilitarian view that society is merely a collection of individuals who come together for mutual benefit or contractual agreements.
For instance, thinkers like Thomas Hobbes and Herbert Spencer argued that individuals form societies through contractual relationships to regulate interactions and enhance personal benefits.
Durkheim's Argument: He counters this by asserting that contracts and social arrangements are not merely individual creations but are embedded within a pre-existing moral and institutional framework established by society at large.
Evolution from Mechanical to Organic Solidarity
3.Mechanical Solidarity
In simpler societies characterized by what Durkheim terms "mechanical solidarity," individuals are bound together by shared traditions, beliefs, and similar roles.
Social cohesion is based on likeness and similarity rather than interdependence, as everyone performs similar tasks and contributes in a self-sufficient manner.
Consequences: This homogeneity limits individuality and diversity of thought, fostering strong collective sentiments and punitive reactions against deviance or crime that threatens social unity.
4.Transition to Organic Solidarity
As societies grow and become more complex due to population increase and specialization, they transition towards "organic solidarity."
Specialization creates interdependence among individuals who perform diverse roles, fostering a division of labour where each person relies on others for various needs.
Durkheim's Insight: This transition illustrates how societal evolution leads to a more complex form of social cohesion based on functional interdependence rather than mere similarity.
Durkheim's critique of individualism and his concept of social solidarity challenge simplistic views of society as merely an aggregate of individuals driven by self-interest or contractual agreements. Instead, he argues for a broader understanding where society's foundations lie in shared norms, values, and social structures that transcend individual actions. This perspective highlights the evolution of societal cohesion from mechanical to organic forms, emphasizing the role of interdependence and specialization in shaping modern social dynamics.
Functionalism
Durkheim integrated Comte’s and Spencer’s organic analogy into the study of society.
According to the organic view, society resembles an organism, where various parts are interconnected and work together to maintain stability.
Social phenomena cannot be fully understood by examining individual elements; rather, they must be seen in the context of the whole society.
In simple societies, there's a strong shared belief system and cooperation among individuals with similar tasks, leading to social integration.
As society grows more complex, with division of labour and specialization, individuals become more interdependent.
Social facts
1. Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) is chiefly remembered for his role in establishing sociology as an independent academic discipline.
2. He advocated for the recognition of sociology as a distinct science capable of addressing the moral and intellectual challenges of contemporary society.
3. In understanding Durkheim's conception of sociology, three key aspects are highlighted:
a) The general conditions necessary for the development of social science.
b) Sociology's focus on the study of 'social facts'.
c) The methodology employed in sociological inquiry.
GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SOCIAL SCIENCE
Discussed in one of the previous section.
SOCIOLOGY AS A STUDY OF ‘SOCIAL FACTS
1. Social facts, according to Durkheim, are ways of acting, thinking, and feeling that exist external to the individual and possess a coercive power that controls individuals.
Social facts are not just individual actions or beliefs but are external to individuals, existing within the framework of society itself. They possess a coercive power in the sense that they constrain and shape individual behavior through social norms, collective values, and institutional structures.
2. Durkheim views society as a unique reality, sui generis, formed by the association of individuals, distinct from other realities studied by physical or biological sciences.
Durkheim's concept of society as sui generis (a unique entity) means that society is more than just the sum of its individual members. It has emergent properties and structures that cannot be reduced to or explained solely by understanding individuals. This perspective contrasts with approaches in physical or biological sciences that focus on individual components rather than the emergent properties of collective entities like society.
3. The reality of society transcends individuals and represents a specific reality with its own characteristics, making it the subject matter of sociology.
Durkheim asserts that society has its own reality and characteristics that go beyond individual experiences and actions. This distinct social reality, characterized by social facts and collective representations, becomes the subject matter of sociology. Understanding these collective phenomena is crucial for studying how societies function and evolve over time.
4. Durkheim emphasizes that scientific understanding of social phenomena must arise from the collective or associational characteristics evident in the social structure of a society.
Durkheim's methodology stresses the importance of examining collective characteristics and structures within society. He argued that sociology should focus on studying how social facts operate at a collective level rather than trying to reduce social phenomena solely to individual motivations or actions. This approach helps in uncovering broader patterns and regularities in social life.
5. In his work, Durkheim develops various sociological concepts, including collective representations, which play a significant role in understanding social phenomena.
Collective representations are central to Durkheim's sociological framework. These are shared ideas, beliefs, and symbols that represent collective values and norms within a society. Durkheim used this concept to explain how societies maintain cohesion and continuity through shared meanings and collective conscience. By studying collective representations, Durkheim aimed to elucidate how social order and solidarity are maintained and negotiated in different social contexts.
Social facts
Social facts, according to Durkheim, are ways of acting, thinking, and feeling that exist external to the individual and possess a coercive power that controls individuals.
Durkheim based his scientific vision of sociology on the fundamental principle, i.e., the objective reality of social facts. Social fact is that way of acting, or feeling etc., which is more or less general in a given society. Durkheim treated social facts as things. They are real and exist independent of the individual’s will or desire. They are external to individuals and are capable of exerting constraint upon them. In other words they are coercive in nature. Further social facts exist in their own right. They are independent of individual manifestations. The true nature of social facts lies in the collective or associational characteristics inherent in society. Legal codes and customs, moral rules, religious beliefs and practices, language etc. are all social facts.
Durkheim advocated for sociology to adhere to the model of other sciences, which posed two key requirements. Firstly, the subject of sociology must be distinct and separate from the subjects of all other sciences. Secondly, the subject of sociology must be observable and explainable, akin to the observation and explanation of facts in other sciences. For Durkheim, the subject of sociology is the social fact, and he asserted that social facts should be treated as "things". This perspective implies that social facts possess objective reality and can be studied scientifically, much like physical objects or natural phenomena in other scientific disciplines.
Main characteristics of social facts
Externality:
Social facts exist outside of individual consciences. They are defined externally to individuals and are inherent within society itself. For example, legal obligations and religious practices are external to individual consciousness and exist prior to and independently of individual actions.
Social facts are external to individuals in two senses: Firstly, individuals are born into existing societies with predefined values, norms, beliefs, and practices, which they learn through socialization. These phenomena exist independently of individual will and have an objective reality. Secondly, individuals are only single elements within the totality of relationships that constitute society. These relationships are not created by any single individual but emerge from interactions among multiple individuals. Durkheim compares this relationship to the combination of chemical elements to form new substances, with the emergent phenomena residing in the totality formed by their union. According to Durkheim Émile Durkheim “whenever any elements combine and thereby produce, by the fact of their combination, new phenomena, it is plain that these new phenomena reside not in the original elements but in the totality formed by their union”. You must have seen quite often in daily life that there is a difference between individuals and the group, especially when demands are made by a group. Individually members may agree on a thing, but collectively they may not. In wider society, we find a number of rules of behavior which “reside exclusively in the very society itself which produces them, and not in its parts, i.e. its members” (Durkheim) in putting forward this criterion Durkheim wanted to show that social facts are distinct from individual or psychological facts. Therefore their study should be conducted in an autonomous discipline independent of Psychology, i.e. Sociology.
Constraint:
Social facts exert a constraint on individuals. They are recognized because they impose themselves on individuals and are obligatory for all members of society. For instance, laws and cultural norms impose constraints on individual behavior, and social phenomena like crowd behavior can impose feelings or thoughts on everyone within the group.
Social facts assert themselves through moral constraint on individuals. When individuals resist social facts, they face ridicule, social isolation, or legal and moral sanctions. However, most individuals conform to social facts, not necessarily out of fear of sanctions but due to the acceptance of their legitimacy. This conformity is essential for social order, as society needs to exert control or pressure over its members.
Durkheim refutes the utilitarian viewpoint that society can function optimally if individuals pursue their self-interest. He argues that individual and societal interests do not always align, necessitating societal control over its members. Education, for example, plays a crucial role in socializing individuals and instilling societal norms and values. Durkheim emphasizes that social facts cannot be defined solely by their universality; rather, their collective aspects and transmission through socialization processes characterize truly social phenomena.
In summary, social facts are recognized because they are external to individuals and capable of exerting coercion over them. They are general and collective, imposed on individuals within a given society
Independence:
Social facts are independent of the personal characteristics of individuals or universal attributes of human nature. They have a general occurrence within society and are not determined by individual preferences or characteristics. Examples include collective beliefs, feelings, and practices shared by a social group.
Generality:
Social facts have a general occurrence within society and are not specific to individual experiences or circumstances. They represent collective content of social groups or societies and differ from what occurs in individual consciousness. Social facts can be categorized and classified, forming the subject matter of sociology as a science.
The Rules of Sociological Methods
To visualize social facts as objective reality, he suggested certain rules of studying the social facts which were explained in his The Rules of Sociological Method, 1895:
Rules for observation of social facts
Durkheim emphasizes the need to consider social facts as real entities worthy of direct attention and study. Instead of being analyzed solely through concepts or notions, social facts should be examined empirically, using the same methodological rigor as in natural sciences. This approach is particularly crucial in social sciences due to the tendency to either dismiss social facts as lacking substantive reality or to oversimplify complex phenomena. To counteract these tendencies, Durkheim asserts that social facts must be treated as 'things' and studied objectively. He outlines three rules for objective analysis:
i) Emancipating oneself from common ideas and adopting an emotionally neutral attitude toward the subject of investigation.
ii) Formulating concepts precisely, especially when initial knowledge of the phenomenon is limited. Concepts should focus on observable properties.
iii) Considering social facts independently of their individual manifestations, as they provide a common standard for society members. This entails studying legal rules, moral regulations, proverbs, social conventions, etc., to understand social life objectively.
Durkheim identifies social currents, such as variations in marriage rates or suicide rates, as social facts that are not directly observable but can be studied through statistical analysis. Statistical rates serve as means of verifying propositions related to these theoretical variables. Durkheim highlights suicide rates as an exemplary case of studying social facts, demonstrating how empirical verification can be achieved through statistical analysis
Rules for Distinguishing between the Normal and the Pathological
Durkheim highlights the distinction between "normal" and "pathological" social facts, emphasizing the importance of understanding these concepts within the societal context. He argues that many writers have hindered the scientific study of human behavior by labeling behaviors different from their own as pathological.
According to Durkheim, a social fact is considered normal when it is prevalent in a given type of society and serves a utility for that society. He uses the example of crime to illustrate this point, suggesting that while crime may be considered immoral, it is not abnormal because it exists in various societies and can prompt changes in behavior and societal norms. Durkheim cites the example of Socrates, whose defiance of Athenian law contributed to the evolution of morality and freedom of thought.
Drawing inspiration from the scientific approach to medicine, where both normal and pathological features of the body are studied to understand its nature, Durkheim applies a similar method to the study of social facts
Rules for the Classification of Social Types
Durkheim presents an intermediary viewpoint regarding collective life, rejecting both the idea that each society is entirely unique and the notion that all societies belong to a single human species. Instead, he introduces the concept of "social species" or "social types," acknowledging the diversity among societies while still advocating for their scientific comparison, classification, and explanation.
The classification of societies into types is crucial for explanation, as problems and their solutions differ across social types. Furthermore, determining whether a social fact is normal or abnormal requires understanding its relation to a specific social type. Durkheim refers to this process as "social morphology," which involves classifying societies based on common characteristics.
To establish social types, Durkheim suggests studying individual societies comprehensively and then comparing them to identify similarities and differences. He emphasizes the importance of observing particular cases in their entirety before generalizing, arguing that even one well-made observation can suffice to establish a law or pattern.
Durkheim proposes classifying societies based on their degree of organization, starting with "perfectly simple societies" or "societies of one segment" and progressing to more complex forms. Within each type, distinctions can be made based on whether a complete fusion of initial segments occurs.
John Rex examines Durkheim's approach, discussing its usefulness in sociological investigations. While biological approaches may aid in description, classification, and the formulation of average types, they encounter difficulties when applied to the historical study of societies. In historical contexts, the discovery of "species" is often influenced by the historical process itself, making a theory of evolution less applicable.
Rules for the Explanation of Social Facts
1. Durkheim identifies two approaches to explaining social facts: the causal and the functional.
The causal approach seeks to understand why a social phenomenon exists.
The functional approach aims to establish the correspondence between the phenomenon and the general needs of society.
3. Durkheim emphasizes the importance of the social character of sociological inquiry.
He distinguishes between individual and societal realities, cautioning against explanations solely based on individual characteristics or psychology.
Causal explanations should focus on preceding social facts, while functional explanations analyze a social fact's relation to social ends.
4. Durkheim stresses the comparative nature of sociological research.
To demonstrate causality, sociologists compare cases where phenomena are present or absent.
Since sociologists lack labouratory-controlled experiments, they rely on the comparative method or indirect experimentation.
5. Durkheim highlights the method of concomitant variations as essential for the comparative method.
This method compares phenomena's variations to reveal intrinsic causal relationships.
It can be applied at different levels, from single societies to distinct social species, to explain complex social institutions.
6. Durkheim considers comparative sociology as the foundation of the science of society.He asserts that comparative sociology is not a separate branch but inherent to sociology itself when aiming to explain social phenomena comprehensively.
Normal and Pathological
Durkheim lived during a period of significant social change, marked by industrialization, urbanization, and political upheaval, which threatened traditional social structures.
The 'problem of order'—how societies maintain cohesion amidst change—has been central to sociology's history, with different thinkers addressing it in diverse ways.
Karl Marx, for instance, emphasized conflict and coercion as driving forces in society, rooted in material inequalities.
In contrast, Durkheim focused on social cohesion and solidarity, based on shared norms and values, rather than coercion.
While recognizing the existence of force in periods of change, Durkheim emphasized morality as essential for social integration.
Durkheim sought to identify patterns and regularities amidst social change, developing sociological methods and concepts to theorize about them.
His approach prioritized the study of social processes and 'social facts,' which are identifiable and analyzable due to their external nature and constraining influence.
Durkheim categorized social facts as 'normal' and 'pathological,' providing a framework for understanding deviations from societal norms.
Understanding the Concepts of ‘Normal’ and ‘Pathological’
In ordinary language, the terms 'normal' and 'pathological' refer to states or conditions that are commonly expected or deviate from the expected norms, respectively.
Normal:
When something is described as 'normal,' it means it conforms to what is typical, ordinary, or expected. For example, if your body functions in its usual manner without any abnormalities, it is considered normal.
Pathological:
On the other hand, 'pathological' refers to states that are abnormal, unhealthy, or deviate from the expected norms. For instance, if your body experiences illness or dysfunction, it is considered pathological.
.
DISTINCTION BETWEEN NORMAL AND PATHOLOGICAL SOCIAL FACTS
1. Durkheim recognized the difficulty of identifying pathology in sociology due to subjective interpretations of behavior. He aimed to establish objective criteria for determining 'normality' and 'pathology' in social phenomena.
2. He argued that 'normality' could be determined by the universal presence of a social fact in a particular type of society. For example, son-preference in traditional societies, despite being discriminatory, is considered 'normal' within that societal context.
3. Durkheim categorized social facts as 'normal' when they are generally prevalent in a given type of society and align with its functioning conditions.
4. In his work "The Division of Labour," Durkheim illustrated how the decline of traditional beliefs in complex societies is a normal characteristic resulting from the growth of organic solidarity and functional interdependence.
5. He emphasized the need to analyze whether the conditions that render a social fact 'normal' still persist in evolving societies. For instance, the persistence of the caste system in India amidst modernization raises questions about its compatibility with new societal values.
6. Durkheim's rules for distinguishing between 'normal' and 'pathological' social facts include:
Normality is determined by the prevalence of a social fact in an average society of a given type at a specific phase of its evolution.
Verification involves establishing the relationship between the general character of the phenomenon and the general conditions of collective life in the societal type under consideration.
7. Durkheim's application of these rules led to controversial propositions, such as his suggestion that crime is a universally observed social fact across all societies and periods.
Durkheim's approach provides a framework for understanding societal norms and deviations, shedding light on the complexities of social order and change.
Durkheim’s Analysis of Crime
Durkheim's assertion that crime is a normal and necessary phenomenon in society might seem paradoxical given its association with immorality and pathology. However, he argues that crime serves vital functions in maintaining social order and facilitating societal progress.
1. Role of Collective Feelings: Durkheim defines crime as actions that offend strong collective sentiments. If society were to eliminate all such actions, the collective conscience would become excessively repressive, stifling individual creativity and innovation.
2. Necessity for Deviance: Total conformity to norms is impractical and stifling. Some degree of deviance is necessary to allow for societal evolution and the reaffirmation or modification of norms.
3. Direct Utility of Crime: Crime serves as a catalyst for societal change and moral evolution. Durkheim cites the example of Socrates, whose defiance of societal norms contributed to the advancement of morality and freedom of thought.
4. Indirect Consequences of Crime: Criminal acts provoke negative sanctions from the community, which reinforces normative consensus and strengthens social cohesion. By arousing the collective conscience against the crime, crime indirectly contributes to the maintenance of societal order.
Durkheim's perspective challenges conventional views of crime as purely pathological. Instead, he sees it as an integral part of societal dynamics, serving both direct and indirect functions in the maintenance and evolution of social order. Understanding crime as a normal phenomenon helps illuminate Durkheim's broader insights into social pathology and societal change.