In the volume "The division of labor in the society," Durkheim recognizes that the concept of work division if common across all communities in the world.
The main aim of the author in writing this book is to identify why division of labor is universal. Durkheim notices that as a community advances, the labor division also increases (Durkheim, 2014). The volume describes social solidarity as a complete ethical sensation which by itself is not agreeable to precise observation and measurement. Another concept outlined by Durkheim is the types of laws which exists as a result of social solidarity. According to Durkheim, the ultimate way to categorize laws is on the kinds of punishment which result from the legislation. Two types of laws are identified which are repressive and restitutory rules. Repressive laws are fines enacted on the criminal. On the other hand, restitutory laws are those that reinstate thing to the way they existed before the misconduct was done (Durkheim, 2014).
Analysis and Evaluation
The book “The Division of labor in the society” by Durkheim main arguments and concepts include communal cohesion, split of work and type of laws. Durkheim notices that labor division is beneficial to the community since it increases the procreative capacity of a job procedure and the skillset of the workers (Durkheim, 2014). Further, labor division establishes a feeling of solidarity among individuals who share roles in the society. The author argues that division of labor goes beyond economic interests. In the course of sharing roles and responsibilities, the societal and moral order is established in the community. According to Durkheim, labor division is correlated to the ethical density of a society (Durkheim, 2014). In this scenario, the author states that density happens in three forms which are via the development of towns, through the increase of the spatial concentration of individuals, and by improvement of communication means in the society.
Durkheim recognizes that there are two forms of social solidarities which are mechanical and organic. The mechanical solidarity links a person to the community without any intercessor. In existence of mechanical solidarity, the society is ordered mutually, and all people share a common set of roles and primary beliefs (Durkheim, 2014). Collective consciousness is what connects a person to the society according to the author. On the other hand, with organic solidarity, a community is more complicated since it exists as a scheme with diverse functions which are connected by definite relations (Durkheim, 2014). Individuality develops as parts of the community grows more multifaceted. By Durkheim, the more primitive a culture is, the more it is categorized by mechanical unity.
The two types of rules identified by Durkheim is present in human cultures, and every one of them resembles a kind of societal solidarity those communities apply. The repressive laws match to the focus of common consciousness, and every person participates in arbitrating and punishing the offender (Durkheim, 2014). The strictness of a crime is not determined necessarily as the injury suffered by an individual casualty but instead measured as the damage it caused to the entire society. Durkheim notices that punishments for crimes against the community as a whole is classically harsh. On the other hand, restitutive rule centers on the victim since there are no universally public views concerning what damages the community. The author describes that repressive law is common in mechanical or primitive cultures where sanctions for crimes are typically made and agreed upon by the entire society (Durkheim, 2014). The more a community becomes civilized, and labor division is initiated, the more restitutory law occurs.
Strengths
Durkheim’s work contributes important knowledge to socialist and economists. The work is critical for the economists who regard the advancement of labor division as an outcome of the unity of individuals with diverse aptitudes and specialties. Through the division of labor, people live together in harmony, they obey the established laws and support each other as a result of solidarity present.
Limitations
Durkheim’s primary aim was to identify and assess the common variations which had occurred with industrial development to comprehend better the noticeable problems that have ascended. However, the author fails to categorize cultures into groups such as developed and undeveloped communities. The author did not recognize the broad variety of non-developed cultures. Basing on this challenge, if I had a chance to discuss the thoughts with the author, I would recommend him to apply the criteria and approaches of the physical sciences to find mechanically prompted social laws. Further, Durkheim's volume comprises of notable sexist conflicts. The author theorizes individuals as men but recognizes females as distinct, non-communal beings. The book entirely missed out the function of women as participants in both developed and pre-developed cultures. Bratton and Denham (2014) work offer substantial coverage of the current triumvirate of Durkheim concepts. The two authors further criticize Durkheim for failing to adequately implement capitalism and socialism communal theory (Bratton and Denham, 2014 ). According to the Bratton and Denham (2014), Durkheim should have recognized both men and women as social beings.
Conclusion
Three central concepts discussed in "The division of labor in the society" by Durkheim include labor division, social solidarities, and type of laws. As a strength, the author recognizes that labor division does not entirely concern economic gain but morality in the society. The main weakness of the work is sex conflict in that the author does not recognize women as social beings.
Part II
Introduction
Part II will compare and contrast Suicide (1897) and moral education (1925). The two publications were chosen based on what their titles suggest. Arguably, Durkheim published moral education as a lesson to educate people on the consequence of committing suicides.
Analysis and Evaluation
Suicide (1897) work emphasis on the types of suicides. Durkheim defines suicide as the terminology used to describe death cases resulting openly or incidentally for a positive or negative action of the casualty in complete awareness that the act will lead to demise. The author recognizes four types of suicides which are egoistic, altruistic, anomic and fatalistic. Egoistic suicide imitates an extended sense of not being assimilated into a society (Strenski, 2016 ). Persons who are not associated efficiently with common sets are left with slight societal guidance or support and more probable to be involved egoistic suicide. The second kind is altruistic suicide which is associated with a sense of being astounded by a group’s beliefs and objectives. Altruistic suicide happens in communities with high incorporation, where individual requirements are seen as less essential than the entire culture’s needs. Since personal interests are regarded less critical, the author argued that in an altruistic religion, there would be fewer causes of suicides. The third type of suicide is anomic which reflects a person's moral misperception and lack of societal direction that is associated with dramatic economic and communal disturbance. The last type of suicide discussed by Durkheim is fatalistic which occurs when individuals are excessively controlled. As a result, their passions and desires are blocked by cruel discipline (Strenski, 2016 ). For instance, most prisoners may wish to die rather than be subjected to oppressive prison rules.
The author argues that Catholic religion has normal levels of incorporation while the Protestant community has low levels of integration. As a result, Durkheim explores the different suicide rates among Catholics and Protestants, stating that stronger social control among people who belong to the Catholic Church commit fewer suicides (Strenski, 2016 ). I think Durkheim is wrong on this rates of deaths among the Catholics and the Protestants. Most likely, the author collected data from the early researchers and in a small sample size. As a result, it is wrong to conclude that Protestants commit more suicides than the Catholics.
In "moral education" work, Durkheim emphasizes on his initiated theory of society as a morality source. The author views the condition of being related to social structures as a source of ontological perception, rules of conduct and moral judgment. In this work, Durkheim describes morality as comprised of three components which are autonomy, attachment, and discipline (Strenski, 2016 ). Attachment is defined as the rate at which an individual is willing to be dedicated to a communal group. Autonomy is regarded self-accountability of one's acts. Finally, the author considers discipline as a concept which restraints impulses and trends (Strenski 2016 ).
The two works by Durkheim, suicide and moral education contribute some common social knowledge. Suicide describes the types and causes of deaths related to social segregation while moral authority emphasizes on accountability of one's actions. As a result, individuals should be accountable for their actions regardless of whether they are isolated in the society or not.
Conclusion
Though written in different periods, suicide and moral education have some common theoretical insights. The two works were selected for comparison by a simple evaluation of the titles. The moral teaching from the two volumes is that people should be accountable for their actions regardless of their relationship with various groups in the society.
References
Bratton, J., " Denham, D. (2014). Capitalism and Classical Social Theory: Second edition. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Durkheim, E. (2014). The division of labor in the society. London: Free press.
Strenski, I. (2016). Emile Durkheim. London: Routledge.
