Perspectives of Emile Durkheim and Karl Marx
The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were full of evolving social and economic ideas. These views of the social structure of urban society came about through the development of ideas taken from the past revolutions. As the Industrial Revolution progressed through out the world, so did the gap between the class structures. The development of a capitalist society was a very favorable goal for the upper class. By using advanced methods of production introduced by the Industrial Revolution, they were able to earn a substantial surplus by ruling the middle class. Thus, maintaining their present class of life, while the middle class was exploited and degraded. At this time in history, social theorists like Emile Durkheim and Karl Marx challenged the aspect of social structure in their works. Emile Durkheim is known as a functionalist states that everything serves a function in society and his main concern to discover what that function was. On the other hand Karl Marx, a conflict theorist, stresses that society is a complex system characterized by inequality and conflict that generate social change. Both Durkheim and Marx were concerned with the characteristics of groups and structures rather than with individuals.
The functionalist perspective in society is a view of society that focuses on the way various parts of society have functions, or possible effects that maintain the stability of the whole. Durkheim developed the idea of society as an integrated system of interrelated parts. He wanted to establish how the various parts of society contribute to the maintenance of the whole. He also focused on how various elements of social structure function to maintain social order and equilibrium. Durkheim stressed that culture is the product of a community and not of single individuals. He argued that the ultimate reality of human life is sociological and not psychological. The sociological reality, which Durkheim called the collective conscience, exists beyond the individual and individual actions. Durkheim characterizes collective conscience as “a totality of beliefs and sentiments common to average citizens of the same society forms a determinate system which has its own life” (Ritzer, 82). In Durkheim’s opinion a whole is not identical to the sum of its parts, thus society is not just a mere sum of individu...
... middle of paper ...
...sband’s property (Ritzer, 63). Marx says that this corresponds precisely the definition of unequal division of labor in the modern society. Where an employer degraded a worker until the worker becomes the private property of the industry and therefore no different than a slave. Just as a slave is not free to decide whether or not to work on a given day, neither is the worker. Both must work in order to survive.
Ultimately, many social thinkers in the history of sociology have challenged the topic of social structure in their works. Social thinkers like Emile Durkheim and Karl Marx have spent their entire lives formulating theories that would explain the status of individuals in societies. From a functionalist perspective sociologist like Emile Durkheim looks at society as a system with various parts that contribute to the maintenance of the whole. On the other hand Karl Marx, a conflict theorist, stresses that society is a complex system characterized by inequality and conflict that generate social change. Both theorists looked at a social system as a set of mutually supporting elements, unlike for Mark, it was hard for Durkheim to explain how change might occur in a society.
Guy Montag, usually referred to as “Montag,” is a third generation fireman in the world of Fahrenheit 451 (Bradbury 42). His world is a place where firemen start fires rather than putting them out; until the start of the book he does not question anything he is told (Bradbury 15). Montag goes through a series of events that cause him to doubt what he has always known. He learns that not all people are what his society finds normal, and when a woman is burned alive he feels that he needs to know more about what these books are all about (Bradbury 16, 35). As these events unfold before him, Guy becomes more and more intrigued with the books. He becomes so intrigued that he steals a book from the woman’s house before they burn it, which is later revealed that he has been doing for a while (Bradbury 34, 53). Throughout all this Montag finds that he is quite unhappy with his life, but he does not kn...
Karl Marx (1818-1883) and Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) were sociologists who both existed throughout similar time periods of the 19th and early 20th centuries, resulting in both Marx, and Durkheim to be concerned about similar effects and impacts among society (Appelrouth and Edles: 20, 77). Marx’s main focus was on class distinctions among the bourgeoisie and proletariat, forces and relations of production, capital, surplus value, alienation, labour theory of value, exploitation and class consciousness (Appelrouth and Edles: 20). Whereas Durkheim’s main focus was on social facts, social solidarity – mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity, anomie, collective conscience, ritual, symbol, and collective representations (Appelrouth and Edles: 77). For the purpose of this essay, we will be focusing on the concerns that arised among Karl Marx and Émile Durkheim towards the benefits and dangers of modern capitalism. Marx and Durkheim’s concepts are comparable in the sense that Marx focuses on alienation and classes, which is similar to Durkheim’s concepts of anomie and the division of labour. The beginning of the Industrial Revolution and technological advances can be seen as a key factor that gave emergence to modern capitalism, as the economic system was based on private ownership, mass production, and increased profits, resulting in people to be separated based on class and the division of labour, later giving rise to alienation and anomie. In this essay, I will explore Karl Marx’s and Émile Durkheim’s evaluation of the benefits and dangers that came about with the rise of modern capitalism. Through these two theorists and sociologists, we can analyze, discuss, compare, critique, and come to understand how modern cap...
Much like the later structural functionalists that he would inspire, such as Radcliffe-Brown, Durkheim’s grounding in science led to a methodological strength. By focusing on understanding a single aspect of society, such as division of labor or suicide rates, Durkheim could focus on empirical data to create a testable hypothesis based on statistics. This makes it easy to refute and/or refine statements he made, but also made them easier to compare cross-culturally to see if variation exists.
Bracken fern (Pteridium aquiline var. pubescens) are deciduous and grow from brown to black woody rhizomes, forming large often dense patches. The leaves emerge from erect fronds and are pinnately compound, scattered, erect, coarse, narrowly or broadly triangular, to 2 m in height. Fronds (leaves) are pinnules (ultimate segments), entire in the apices of the pinnae, lobed toward the stalk. Reproduction is by spores produced in sporangia lining the under surface margins of the photosynthetic fronds when reproductive, covered by the narrow recurved edge of the leaf (Burrows and Tyrl, 2001, Panter et al., 2011).
Three thinkers form the foundations of modern-day sociological thinking. Émile Durkheim, Karl Marx, and Max Weber. Each developed different theoretical approaches to help us understand the way societies function, and how we are determined by society. This essay will focus on the contrasts and similarities of Durkheim and Weber’s thought of how we are determined by society. It will then go on to argue that Weber provides us with the best account of modern life.
The protagonist of “A Doll’s House”, Nora Helmer, has a perfect life that has been made up, planned, and all done for her by the society and her husband, Torvald. Nora is trapped in a “dollhouse” that is her physical and actual home. Her husband has made and built a perfectly arranged life for his doll wife, and their dolly children. Nora’s relationship with her husband appears lovely and pleasant at first. Indeed she loves Torvald, at least that was what is expected of her. Women are supposed to love their husbands and their husband’s opinion is usually prioritized and superior towards the women’s. It was the custom of that time that women are expected to love their husbands and follow what they say. In the play, Torvald pampers Nora and talks to her as if she was a little baby. He treats her with no respect and sees her as nothing more than a doll, a pet, and a property he owns. Torvald sometimes puts up money above Nora’s head and lets her jump for it like a pet. In t...
Karl Marx acknowledged the theory on conflict and exactly how the situation disturbs society on a macro view. Marx defined the essential basic necessity any person requires to stay alive, that being: food, clothing and shelter etc. Marx claimed that all societies involved conflict, every so often exposed but more usually plunged below the surface of everyday life. However, that was grounded upon vital inequalities and conflicts of interest such as, social classes and wealth. Conflict theory interprets society as a struggle for power between groups engaging in conflict for limited resources. Karl Marx is the founder of conflict theory. Conflict theorists like Marx suggest that there are two general categories of people in industrialized societies: the upper class and the working
Karl Marx noted that society was highly stratified in that most of the individuals in society, those who worked the hardest, were also the ones who received the least from the benefits of their labor. In reaction to this observation, Karl Marx wrote The Communist Manifesto where he described a new society, a more perfect society, a communist society. Marx envisioned a society, in which all property is held in common, that is a society in which one individual did not receive more than another, but in which all individuals shared in the benefits of collective labor (Marx #11, p. 262). In order to accomplish such a task Marx needed to find a relationship between the individual and society that accounted for social change. For Marx such relationship was from the historical mode of production, through the exploits of wage labor, and thus the individual’s relationship to the mode of production (Marx #11, p. 256).
Durkheim was concerned with studying and observing the ways in which society functioned. His work began with the idea of the collective conscious, which are the general emotions and opinions that are shared by a society and which shape likeminded ideas as to how the society will operate (Desfor Edles and Appelrouth 2010:100-01). Durkheim thus suggested that the collective ideas shared by a community are what keeps injustices from continuing or what allows them to remain.
Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim are considered the founding fathers of sociology and both had profound influence on the development of sociology. However, some may say that they differ dearly in their views about society. Although there are differences in outlooks between the two, one thing noticeable is Marx and Durkheim shared the same concern over society and its development. They were both, in particular concerned with the rise of the modern system of division of labour and the evolution of market society taking place in the domain of modern capitalism. Both approached these developments by introducing a theory of their own to shed light on the effects that modern capitalism had on solidarity and on society’s ability to reproduce itself. More so, to understand and solve the problems arose as the societies in which they lived moved from a pre-industrial to an industrial state. For Marx, one of the serious problems arose in this was what he termed alienation. On the other, for Durkheim it was what he called anomie. The purpose of this essay is to examine the underlying differences of these two notions and in hope that it may help us to better understand the different visions of society developed by these two great social thinkers. Firstly, we start off with Marx’s idea of alienation. Secondly, what anomie means to Durkheim. Then a comparison will be done on the two concepts, evaluating the similarities and differences between the two. Lastly, we will finally come to conclude how the concept of alienation differs from the concept of anomie.
Emile Durkheim, Karl Marx, and Max Weber are all important characters to be studied in the field of Sociology. Each one of these Sociological theorists, help in the separation of Sociology into its own field of study. The works of these three theorists is very complex and can be considered hard to understand but their intentions were not. They have their similarities along with just as many of their differences.
Emile Durkheim is another sociologist who used Herbert Spencer’s theory to explain the change in society. He believed that society is a very intricate system of interrelated and interdependent parts that work together to maintain stability (Durkheim 1893). This ensures that the social world is held together by shared values and languages. He wrote the Division of Labor.
Ø In particular with Durkheim’s work, it is too optimistic and maintains the idea of social solidarity as the main theme, and simply believes pathologies can be solved through simple social reform, ignoring any problems or conflict and the affects. Ø Marxists argue that the modern family is organised to support and benefit the ruling class and the capitalist economy, rather than benefiting all of society. In particular, they accuse functionalists for ignoring the fact that power is not equally distributed in society. Some groups have more wealth and power than others and may be able to impose their norms and values as less powerful groups.
In the earliest years of the Vikings, there was little history recorded due to the polytheistic views that they followed. After the Vikings converted to Christianity, there were eventually written documents created pertaining to their existence. In Viking Warfare, I.P. Stephenson states that the Vikings “first described attack took place in AD 789”(11). The Vikings were also known as Norsemen. They were great storytellers, and that is perhaps how society knows so much about them today. The stories that the Norsemen told were called Sagas. Today, Vikings are often depicted as murderous savages, but while they were not pillaging villages they were actually quite a peaceful civilization. There were three countries that Vikings evolved from; Norway, Denmark, and Sweden. Although it may seem that all Vikings were on the same side, they quarreled with each other as well. Despite the fact that Viking battles were bloody and gruesome they were also known to be the most hygienic out of many of the earlier civilizations. There was not a huge percentage of Vikings that went out and raided but when they did they made a huge impact on what Vikings are now known for. The success of Viking warfare and raids relied primarily on the uses of armor, weapons, long ships, and battle tactics.
The first thing that the reader will notice regarding gender is the title of the play “A Doll’s House”. This reveals to the reader, Nora’s and possible Torvald’s status within the play. Nora is unable to be herself as she is not seen as an equal in her marriage. Instead, she is something to be admired and flaunted. This need for her to be something that Torvald can show off. Both Nora and Torvald are living lives based on illusion. Torvald has made Nora his perfect little doll so that he can look good. She thinks that he is a person with incredible strength, she becomes disillusioned with him at the end of the play when he exposes himself as just a man. This paper will look at the way that society’s expectations of gender roles are perceived