Emile Durkheim is considered to be the founding father of sociology. After establishing sociology as an independent field of study, he also went on to be the first professor of psychology. Durkheim is particularly known for pioneering important sociological concepts, such as social facts, which went on to form the founding basis of sociology. Through his work on social facts, Durkheim was able to establish the complex relations individuals have to their society and he went one step further and illustrated this through his work on suicide, which determined that suicide has social causes. This essay seeks to explore the concept of social facts, outline its meaning and use Durkheim’s work on suicide to illustrate the concept and also identify the importance of studying social facts.
Social Facts
Durkheim is well-known for developing the concept of social facts. A social fact refers to the manner in which an individual acts, which does not necessarily have to be fixed. This form of behaviour tends to have a constraining effect on the individual, and the effect is evident throughout the entire society (Durkheim, 1938). Most notably, a social fact is both independent and external to the individual (Thompson and Thompson, The Rules of Sociological Method, 1987). By referring to social facts as being influential on the general society, Durkheim was able to determine the social feature of social facts (Willer, 1968).
To elaborate social facts, Durkheim provided a very specific example of the same concept. According to him, other philosophies, such as utilitarianism, which sought to explain the society often placed more emphasis on the individual self. For instance, he considered utilitarianism to disregard the existence of social aspects, such as rules, customs, and other social facts that determined the manner in which an individual behaves. He was able to “override private will” and demonstrate that individuals cannot exist as autonomous individuals. Instead, social facts often drive them to cooperate with each other, to a point at which they eventually submit to social facts, such as rules (Morrison, 2006). In fact, a majority of social facts include stable structures, like government and law institutions, which have existed for a long time (Sawyer, 2002).
Social facts have two main identifying features, which make them social. Durkheim went to great lengths to explain this social aspect of social facts. He identified two main features of social facts. First, Durkheim considered social facts to be external in nature (Sawyer, 2002). The external nature of social facts can be expounded from two viewpoints. To begin with, each single individual is born into an already established society, which has pre-determined structures, norms and organization. These features of the society tend to have a direct influence on the individual’s personality. Essentially, a religious individual is born into a society that already has pre-determined religious beliefs and practices, which he then follows. Additionally, social facts are external as an individual finds himself being a single component of an interconnected society. The relations between people in a society are not created by a single individual. Conversely, they are the direct result of the continued interaction of different members of the society (Giddens, 1971).
Durkheim went on to provide a more succinct explanation of the externality of social facts, by putting forth his own experience with social facts. He explained that he meets his obligations as both a citizen and a brother. The duties and responsibilities he performs in these roles have been defined by aspects that exist outside of his individual self. They are objective and not a result of own invention. In fact, he goes on to explain that he found these customs already being practiced by other people in the society when he was born. Essentially, norms that govern his behaviour, feelings, beliefs and overall personality exist outside his individual consciousness (Morrison, 2006; Durkheim, 1938; Thompson and Thompson, The Rules of Sociological Method, 1987).
Secondly, Durkheim’s also considered social facts to be constraining. This has come to be considered the causal feature of Durkheim’s social facts (Sawyer, 2002). Once again, Durkheim was able to elaborate the coercive nature of social facts. According to him, paternity can be considered a biological relation, in which an individual’s biological relation with a child he has sired makes him the child’s father. He also went on to demonstrate the social relation of paternity. Laws, social norms and customs often lead an individual to act in a particular manner to towards his child. For instance, a father is expected to provide for and protect his children. Today, laws even call on fathers to provide financial support for their children. In this regard, an individual is constrained by laws, norms and customs, to fulfil the duties and obligations that come with fatherhood (Giddens, 1971).
The coercive power of social facts is often not easily noticeable. For example, individuals often comply with various rules and regulations. They often consider this complacency to be a form of free-will. They believe that they are making an independent choice to comply. This is far from reality, in which people often follow the patterns that are prominent in their society. Refusal to adhere to these predetermined patterns often results in either social isolation or punishment (Giddens and Griffiths, 2006). In this regard, the constraining feature of social facts is often felt when an individual chooses to act against them. This is because they individual will feel the resistance of social facts, that accompanies such an action, often meant at promoting an individual’s adherence (Giddens, 1971).
A clear understanding of social facts can also be established by differentiating them from individual facts. Unlike individual facts, social facts exert external influence on individuals. This works to show that people’s actions are not a result of free-will, a concept commonly associated with individual facts. Additionally, social facts place an individual within a greater context, which is the society. This present a stark contrast to individual facts, which refuse to acknowledge the coercive power the society has on the individual. Furthermore, social facts demonstrate that the society is not only made up of individuals, a belief commonly associated with individual facts, but also that there are other things which exist within the society and are external to the individual self (Morrison, 2006). Essentially, social facts manage to successfully capture the special features of the social phenomenon, a challenge that proved to be unsuccessful for individual facts (Alpert, 1939).
Suicide
Durkheim’s study on suicide was one of his most notable works, which both validates and illustrates the concept of social facts. Before Durkheim’s study on suicide, the act of self killing was considered to be a psychological issue. Studies published before Durkheim’s work concluded that suicide was a phenomenon best explained by psychology (Lukes, 1973). According to them, an individual’s decision to kill himself stemmed from serious mental health issues. Furthermore, suicide was treated as an individual fact, and hence its association with the field of psychology (Lukes, 1973).
However, once Durkheim was able to establish the concept of social facts, he went on to demonstrate that suicide was a direct result of “patterned behaviour”, which was beyond an individual’s sense of self-control and autonomy. As mentioned above, social facts tend to produce “patterned behaviour” in the sense that they are both external and constraining, hence determining people’s actions and behaviours (Giddens, 1971; Thompson and Thompson, The Rules of Sociological Method, 1987; Giddens and Griffiths, 2006; p. Morrison, 2006). In this regard, Durkheim was able to show that most phenomena regarded as being purely individuals have their roots in social conditions (Appelrouth and Edles, 2012).
Additionally, Durkheim was also able to use the different social groups of people committing suicide to demonstrate that suicide was indeed a social phenomenon. Besides the patterned nature of suicide rates, high suicide rates are also observed in particular social groups (Appelrouth and Edles, 2012). For example, he proved that the highest suicide rates were mainly observed among non-alcoholics and the rich and affluent (Thompson and Thompson, Suicide, 1987). These groups of individuals are often characterized by features, such as a lack of social values and a devaluation of social norms. Owing to this, common psychological causes of suicide, such as distress, drug-use and mental illnesses, were discredited. Instead, suicide was shown to be a direct result of social factors, ranging from a lack of regulation to an individual’s disassociation with the society (Appelrouth and Edles, 2012).
Durkheim also went on to create a theory regarding some of the social facts, which resulted in suicide, while at the same time identifying the different types of suicide. He was able to achieve this by using two key concepts, which were an individual’s level of social integration and level of social regulation (Lise, n.d; Appelrouth and Edles, 2012). When these two concepts are not properly balanced, the society suffers, with suicide being one of the tell-tale signs of a lack of equilibrium. One type of suicide identified by Durkheim is anomic suicide, which occurs when a society’s various expectations of behaviour are unclear. When people’s activities are no longer regulated by the society, they suffer, hence resulting in suicide (Thompson and Thompson, Suicide, 1987). This lack of regulation is a direct result of imbalances, which stem from disturbances such as financial crises, and the reduced role and influence of religion (Thompson and Thompson, Suicide, 1987).
Other types of suicide, identified by Durkheim, include egoistic suicide and altruistic suicide. Egoistic suicide occurs when a person becomes disintegrated from his social group, which explains why Protestants have a higher suicide rate than Catholics, as the members of the former religious groups exercise more free will and are less constrained by religious norms and codes (Thompson and Thompson, Suicide, 1987). Altruistic suicide results from an excessive integration of the individual in the society, which compels him to take it upon himself to end his life for the benefit of the society (Thompson and Thompson, Suicide, 1987). All these different types of suicides are similar in the sense that they are generated at a societal rather than an individual level (Siegrist, 2000). His study on suicide demonstrates that in every society, there is a collective force that compels people to take their own lives (Thompson and Thompson, Suicide, 1987).
Importance of Studying Social facts
The importance of studying social facts cannot be overstated. Since Durkheim’s discovery of the concept of social facts, its significance and subsequent influence on the study of sociology has been prominent. One of the main reasons why social facts ought to be studied is because they denote the importance of sociology, as an independent field of study. Today, the field of sociology presents an on-going and comprehensive study of social phenomenon (Bulgaru, 2013). In fact, Durkheim acknowledged that the social phenomenon cannot be well understood when they are studied in other disciplines, such as psychology (Durkheim, 1895). In this regard, social facts are the founding stone on which sociology is founded. The position adopted by some great thinkers is that a field of study only becomes necessary once its objects of study are proven to have a causality effect (Sawyer, 2002). Social facts have “causal powers” as they influence people’s behaviour (Durkheim, 1915). This indicates that in the absence of social facts, the field of sociology loses its importance and is rendered as an unnecessary discipline, whose objects of study lack any downward causative effect on individual behaviour.
Additionally, social facts should be studied because they provide an effective explanation of how individual behaviour is the direct result of the social state of his environment. Throughout this study, it has become clear that an individual’s mannerisms, behaviour and conduct are a result of the social dynamics of the society. In fact, Durkheim’s study on suicide has not only shown how behavior is patterned but also identified its link to various social causes. In this manner, studying social facts will help provide a sociological explanation, which is independent from psychological and biological phenomenon, of other forms of human behaviour (Lindell, n.d). Social facts identify the relation between the object, which is social, and he subject, which is the individual, which can be used to study similar relations in other social facts (Lise, n.d). For instance, social facts can be used to explain why people tend to vote for either right or left parties based on societal trends such as economic crises (Legget, 1964).
Most importantly, the study of social facts can help create a deeper understanding of social phenomenon, allowing people to develop a healthy society. In his study of social facts, Durkheim expounded on the importance of solidarity. According to him, societies are healthier when there is social solidarity (Lindell, n.d). This means that when there is a right balance of social integration and social regulation, people will experience fewer problems (Thompson and Thompson, Suicide, 1987).In this manner, a continued study of social facts can work to reduce rates of suicide (Young, 1962). On the same note, tracing the social aspects of common diseases and illnesses can also make the society healthier (Siegrist, 2000).
Studying social facts with reference to Durkheim’s study on suicide is also beneficial in identifying the social meaning of suicide. For instance, Durkheim was able to demonstrate how social facts influence people’s decision to commit suicide. However, the same social facts can also be used to understand people’s overall reactions to the same. For instance, the same social facts identified by Durkheim as being the causative factor of suicide can also influence the same people’s decision to classify a person’s death as a suicide. An integrated social group can choose to disguise a suicide as a natural death as opposed to acknowledging it as a suicide. Essentially, the social meaning people attach to suicide can in fact influence the overall statistics of suicide (Douglas, 1967).
The study of social facts is also significant because Durkheim’s own study on suicide demonstrates the need for researchers to ensure that the data they collect for research purposes is accurate and reliable. One of Durkheim’s critics, Max Atkinson, argued that while Durkheim was able to identify a link between suicide and social facts, he did not uncover a new set of suicide rates. Instead, what he uncovered was a different interpretation of death, particularly suicide. To prove this, Max Atkinson, focused on the role played by coroners. They collect both primary and secondary data, which is often influenced by the members of the community (Atkinson, 1971). In this regard, more study on social facts will demonstrate that suicide statistics do not always reflect the real state of suicide. In fact, a comprehensive understanding of social facts and the role they play in society will help establish more valid and accurate rates of suicide rates.
On a recap, this essay has identified social facts and used Durkheim’s work on suicide to provide an analysis of this concept. Social facts refers to the ways in which an individual acts, feels and thinks, which have a reality outside the individual and exert influence on the same. Social facts are both external and coercive, which sets them apart from individual facts. Suicide helps elucidate this since it occurs in a patterned manner and it is also present in specific social groups. In the absence of solidarity, social integration and social regulation, people feel more inclined to commit suicide. In the future, individuals should continue to study social facts, because they are the foundation basis for sociology, they provide an effective explanation of how society influences individual behaviour , their understanding can help maintain the health of the society and they provide social meanings of suicide and form the basis for more accurate suicide statistics.
References:
Alpert, H. (1939). Emile Durkheim and his sociology. New York: Columbia University Press.
Atkinson, J.M (1971). Societal reactions to suicide: The role of coroners’ definitions. In S. Cohen (ed.) Images of Deviance (pp.165-91). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Bulgaru, I. (2013). Emile Durkheim’s sociological thinking evolution from a pedagogical perspective. Procedia –Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 76, pp. 262-66.
Douglas, J.D. (1967). Social meanings of suicide. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Durkheim, E. (1938). The rules of sociological method. New York: The Free Press.
Durkheim, E. (1895). Les Regles Methodes Soiologique. Paris: Press Universitaire de France.
Durkheim, E. (1915). The elementary forms of the religious life. New York: Free Press (Originally Published as Les Formes elementaires de la vie religieuse: le systeme totemique en Australie. Paris: Alcan, 1912).
Giddens, A. (1971). Capitalism and modern social theory: An analysis of the writings of Marx, Durkheim and Max Weber. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Giddens, A. and Griffiths, S. (20006). Sociology, 5th Ed. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Introduction to suicide. (2012). In S. Appelrouth and L.D. Edles, (eds.) Classical and contemporary sociological theory: Test and Readings, 2nd Ed.Los Angeles: SAGE.
Legget, J.C. (1964). Economic insecurity and working-class consciousness. American Sociological Review, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 226-34.
Lindell, M. (n.d). What is the importance of Durkheim’s Suicide to sociology? How relevant are his views about the individual and society today? [Online]. Available at [Accessed July 15, 2018]
Lise, Marcia. (n.d). Essay: What does Durkheim’s argument in suicide say about the relationship between the individual and the social? Are there alternative views of this relationship? [Online] Available at [Accessed July 15, 2018]
Lukes, S. (1973). Emile Durkheim: his life and work. London: Allen Lane.
Morrison, K. (2006). Marx, Durkheim, Weber: formations of modern social thought, 2nd
Ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Sawyer, K.R. (2002). Durkheim’s dilemma: Toward a sociology of emergence. Sociological Theory, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 227-47.
Siegrist, J. (2000). The social causation of health and illness. In G.L. Albrecht, R. Fitzpatrick and S.C. Scrimshaw (eds.) The Handbook of Social Studies in Health and Medicine (pp.100-14). London: SAGE.
Thompson, K., Ed. and Thompson, M., Trans. (1987). The rules of sociological method. In Readings from Emile Durkheim (pp.67-76). London: Routledge.
Thompson, K., Ed. and Thompson, M., Trans. (1987). Suicide. In Readings from Emile Durkheim (pp.91-115). London: Routledge.
Willer, J. (1968). The implications of Durkheim’s Philosophy of Science. Kansas Journal of Sociology, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 175-90.
Young, P.C. (1963). The sociology of Emile Durkheim. Honors and Theses. Paper 291.
