Emile Durkheim

Emile Durkheim was a French sociologist whose work concentrated on redefining

the field of sociology, and he also sought to differentiate it from the fields of philosophy

and psychology. His major works hinged on the themes that society is ‘real’, and that this

reality is the core of sociology (Ritzer 2011, 184). Principal to Durkheim’s sociology is

the study of social facts (and most notably the social fact of suicide). Durkheim also gives

his own take on the division of labour in society across different types of societies.

Durkheim’s sociology has been branded with the term ‘functionalism’, as he

believed that society was constituent of different parts, each of which is related to the

others, and each remaining with its own function (Dillon 2010, 79). Durkheim focused

on what he termed ‘social facts’, which is defined as “those external and collective ways

in which society shapes, structures and constrains our behaviour.” (80). In this brand of

sociology, society is not just constituent of individuals; it has its own features and

dynamics which influence the individual. In order to study social facts, Durkheim said

that sociologists should approach social facts as things, and because social facts cannot be

measured objectively, they should be explained only by other social facts (Ritzer 2011,

185).

To Durkheim, social facts should be considered within their own realm, rather

than be studied on the level of the individual; for example, Durkheim studied suicide by

explaining it with other social facts, rather than in the context of the individual (Ritzer

2011, 185). He also makes the distinction between material and non-material social facts.

Material social facts can be seen directly, for example, architecture (188). Durkheim,

however, placed more focus on the study of non-material social facts, such as culture

1

(188). He also considered ‘social problems’ as normal and in his view, they were

unavoidable (Dillon 2010, 83). For example, crime had its place to uphold the collective

sentiments held by society by inflicting punishment on those who committed it

(Haralambos and Holborn 2004, 333).

Non-material social facts, like morality and the collective conscience, can be

examined to further understand how the concept works. Durkheim thought that society

would not become immoral, as morality was “identified with society” and he believed

that common morality was necessary for society (Ritzer 2011, 189). He was also of the

opinion that individuals were ruled by their baser needs, and needed the common

morality and influence of society to regulate them (190) This assumption of human

nature can be seen as a major criticism of his work, as he does not provide empirical

evidence for this (215).

Durkheim coined the term ‘collective conscience’ to refer to “shared

understandings, norms, and beliefs.” (Ritzer 2011, 190). A feminist critique of this idea is

that “the allegedly objective ‘collective feeling’ frequently excludes those who are not

part of the dominant (white male) group in the society.” (Dillon 2010, 91). Later on in his

work, Durkheim focused less on collective conscience, but more on the idea of collective

representations, for example, religious symbols and popular folklore as collective

conscience could not be studied with direct methods. (190).

One of Durkheim’s most well known works was focused on suicide, which is a

non-material social fact. He came up with four types of suicide, each with their own

contributing social facts to explain them. These were the integration of persons within

2

their society, and the level of regulation the person experienced within the society (Ritzer

2011, 200).

His first type is called the egoistic suicide, where the individual is not integrated

well enough into the society; this person does not have the social ties and attachments to

prevent them from committing suicide. For example, Durkheim found that individuals

who are married are less likely to commit suicide when compared with unmarried people

(Dillon 2010, 101).

The second type of suicide is the altruistic suicide, where the person is too

integrated into their society (Ritzer 2011, 201). These individuals can commit suicide out

of a feeling of obligation, due to precedent, or even shame. For example, Japan is a

society in which its people are tightly integrated into the society, and a loss of honour has

long been attributed to the cause of suicides (Dillon 2010, 100).

The third type of suicide is called the anomic suicide, which is committed when a

person has too little regulation (Ritzer 2011, 202). For instance, Las Vegas, Nevada, the

suicide rate is uncommonly high. This is boiled down to low regulation within the city,

and because the population tends to have no roots in the society to integrate them (Dillon

2010, 103). Anomic suicide also occurs in societies disrupted by war, natural disasters

and the like, where society’s means for regulation crumbles (103).

The last type of suicide is fatalistic suicide, where regulation is considered

excessive (Ritzer 2011, 202). According to Ritzer, “The classic example is the slave who

takes his own life because of the hopelessness associated with the oppressive regulation

of his every action.” (202)

3

Durkheim also studied the division of labour in society at length. He said that, as

societies became more modern, the division of labour would increase; he also argued that

this was not a bad thing, and that this would herald the emergence of a new kind of social

morality (Ritzer 2011, 193). This is a factor in to his two types of societies: traditional

and modern. In traditional societies, there is the trend of uniformity; ethnic, social and

occupations tend to be very similar (Dillon 2010, 92). This is mechanical solidarity,

where no one person is necessary for the function of the society. These societies also

have harsh penalties for those who break laws or step out of line, which Durkheim termed

‘repressive law’. For example, one can consider the laws implemented in Afghanistan

under the Taliban, where stepping out of line meant beatings or even execution. This

contrasts with ‘restitutive law’ which seeks to re-integrate offenders into the society,

which is seen in countries like the United States (Ritzer 2011, 195). This type of law

exists in modern societies, which have organic solidarity, where people’s roles become

more specialised; this is also a means of bringing them together as every part is needed to

keep the society working.

Emile Durkheim’s sociology focused on how the individual was influenced by the

society, and not vice versa, as was the view of other classical theorists. His work touched

on the study of social facts and how they explained one another, and his

conceptualizations of society. He treated the society as a distinct entity, and to some

extent, discounted the existence of individual difference in spearheading an individual’s

actions, reactions and choices. Though criticisms of some aspects of his work exist, it

remains a useful part of understanding the evolution of sociological thinking through the

ages.

4

Works Cited

Dillon, Michele. "Emile Durkheim." In Introduction to Sociological Theory, 78-111.

West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010

Haralambos, Michael and Martin Holborn. Sociology Themes and Perspectives.

London: HarperCollins Publishers Limited, 2004.

Ritzer, George. "Emile Durkheim." In Classical Social Theory, 183-216. 6th ed. New

York: McGraw Hill, 2011.

5