a.
Anomie: Is
the absence of norms and rules, a form of deregulation within a society when
retrains are not present or simply no longer control the activities of a
population. Ultimately, anomie is the lack of solidarity, which would limit
everyone’s needs. When norms are not present, the needs surpass the means to
obtain them, leading to one’s anguish.
b. Egoistic
Suicide: In an individualistic society, the bonds which tie the individual
to the society grow very weak and the individual starts to depend more on
himself. According to Durkheim, if the individual doesn’t display strong bonds
with his family, religious group and social community, then he is more likely
to commit this type of suicide.
c. Profane: Is
the direct contrary of sacred. Profane is the ordinary, uneventful, practical, what
is not shared but is individual instead. It can be good or evil but never sacred.
Religion is the one thing which defines a separation between sacred and profane.
d.
Sacred: Is always
set apart as superior, forbidden to normal contact. Sacred is shared and not individual,
united into one moral community called church. Sacred constitutes rites and
practices which define a particular accepted conduct. Ultimately sacred is what
makes an individual acceptable within a group and provides solidarity within a
society.
e.
Organic Solidarity:
Fundamentally, solidarity is a set of social relations which link individuals
to each other and, consequently, to society. Organic solidarity is a form of
solidarity present in developed societies, where the existent links binding the
individuals are based on the very heterogeneity amongst them. This is the
product of the division of labor, specialization and the dependence of each
individual on somebody else’s work.
f. Totemism: For
Durkheim, the most elementary form of religion. Includes the separation between sacred and profane; conception of
souls, spirits and mythical beings or objects (totems); and embraces taboos,
celebration, imitation, remembrance, and sorrow. Totemism is the vehicle
through which nature is connected to religion and religion to society,
providing the original source for solidarity.
g. Collective
Consciousness: The shared beliefs and moral
attitudes which operate as a unifying force within society. It is both the
basis and the structure of social life for it determines what is normal and
acceptable.
h. Social Facts:
Elements of society which can be suited independently from the individual. They
are real and fundamental to social life. Sociology has as its main purpose the
study of these facts, because they are objective, diffused, coercive to the
individual and expressed through social practices, rules, doctrines and codes.
i. Religion: System
of beliefs, practices and doctrines unified by sacred (forbidden) dimensions of
social life. It sets the division between sacred and profane. Religion
originates from social life by providing symbols and rituals that enable people
to express themselves and become unified within society. Fundamentally,
religion is the main source of solidarity.
j. Mechanical
Solidarity: Most typical in ancient societies, when mechanical solidarity
is present, the culture is hold together mainly by
the homogeneity (little specialization) amongst its individuals. Unlike
societies where organic solidarity is present, ancient societies have a strong
collective consciousness (i.e. less individualism and autonomy), and the ties
which connect the people within a society are strong; deeply rooted in
sanctions.
2. (50 p) A
question of two parts: (a) Describe the basic postulates of a functionalist
theory, and (b) describe the principal differences between the functionalist
theories of Durkheim and Malinowski (< 200 words).
Functionalism is a theory which
primarily admits society as a system, a unified whole of connected parts. Each
part is supposed to have a specific function (in fact it only exists if it
does), which is ultimately always to maintain the social whole by satisfying
specific social demands.
Malinowski suggested that people
live in a net of social bonds made up of shared values, attitudes and practices
that integrate the group into a whole (culture). The function of this whole is
solely to satisfy people’s needs, namely reproduction, food, shelter, safety,
movement, growth and health. This means that society itself can be explained as
having one ultimate purpose or function, which is to satisfy individual and
explicit needs.
On the
other hand, Emile Durkheim, one of Radcliff-Brown’s benefactors, deeply contributed
to the functionalist opposing theory of structural-functionalism (British Structural
Functionalist School). According to him, social practices are explained by the
urge of stability, creating forms of social solidarity. Through Durkheim’s perspective
of functionalism, social practices are the ones to have a function, which is to
sustain the social structure (solidarity). Naturally, this underlines that form
and structure are both empirical, as Durkheim tries to prove in his book Suicide. Furthermore, his concept of
social facts conveys that these are independent from the individual, consequently
social systems must also independent, thus there can’t be any reference to
psychological or environmental needs.
3. (100 p.)
Succinctly and brilliantly summarize the main argument of Durkheim’s book, Suicide
(< 400 words)
Suicide is a book written by
Emile Durkheim, first published in 1897. Its main point can be found as we
analyze why this sociologist decided to write about suicide, specifically
addressing the possible causes for different suicide rates. Durkheim’s
fundamental objective was to prove that social facts could be empirically
studied; this is, through the scientific method society could be investigated. He
also implied that suicide is a social fact; as he concludes suicide rates are
high at "the time when social life is at its height" or low, which,
at least for Durkheim, proves the sociological origin of suicide[1].
However, Edwin Shneidman, founder-president of the American association of
suicidology, speculated that “Durkheim was not as interested in suicide per se
as he was in the explication of his sociological method”[2]. In fact, discussing suicide in itself doesn’t
appear to have been Durkheim’s main concern. His concern was, on the other
hand, to illustrate his point of objective social science while describing suicide.
Even though Durkheim was trying
to prove that social facts can and must be study through the scientific method,
it is impossible to ignore the conclusions he reached about suicide itself.
First, Durkheim defined suicide[3]
and established its social origins as well as its universality (it has a
“predisposition” to occur in all societies). Primarily focusing on Western
Europe, this sociologist distinguished four types of suicide connected to
either lack or excess of integration or regulation: egoistic (too few ties with
community), altruistic (authority is such that the individual loses his
identity and wishes to sacrifice himself for the society), anomic (individual
can’t adjust to society), fatalistic (excessive
regulation). Durkheim grounded his entire study on tables and charts, for the
rates of suicide are supposed to be statistical representations of this social
fact. Supporting each conclusion with numbers and empirical analysis, for each
type of suicide he meticulously compared the psychological and extra-individual
variables of religion, family, weather, climate, time, one’s civil state,
historical context, country and education; putting an unquestionable emphasis
on the first. He finally concluded that religion was the main key variable in
analyzing rates of suicide (lower in catholic countries and higher in
protestant), which also tied together with his conception that religion was the
main source of solidarity within a society.
4. (100 p.)
Describe the influence of August Comte on Durkheim’s thought (< 300
words).
Europe underwent a period of
dangerous instability during 18th and 19th centuries. During
this period, August Comte and his contemporaries were the first to analyze an
early form of “collectivist philosophy”, which was mainly concerned about
social order and equilibrium. According to them, there had to be a unifying
force behind society, and they finally concluded it was a set of shared beliefs
and moral attitudes. This underlines a holistic view on society, working as an
organism - parts working for a whole - as proposed by Comte. He illustrated
that society “can no more be decomposed into individuals than a line onto
points”[4].
Society is sui generis and must be understand as a unique identity. Society is
a reality in itself, and it can’t be studied through the individuals biased
information. Additionally, as father of positivism, Comte defended that
knowledge could only be obtained when based on empirical experience. He firmly
believed that society was an empirical object of study, so he proposed an objective
science of society. If laws guide human progress, then society is also guided
by observable and testable laws. Emile Durkheim drowned much of his theory of
social facts and society from Comte’s legacy. Like him, Durkheim believed that
society, and therefore social facts, can only be studied through the scientific
method, i.e. using positivism. By understanding society’s objectivity and
reality, a better social order could finally arise. Durkheim also specified and
concretely named Comte’s unifying force behind society, thus coining the term solidarity,
one of Durkheim’s most essential notions to understand how societies are kept
together and how individuals or groups function in society. Finally, Durkheim
adopted Comte’s idea that societies develop from simplicity to complexity, as
it is evident in the development of mechanical to organic solidarity.
5. (100 p) b.
According to Durkheim, what are the relationships among religion, family,
state, and suicide? (< 300 words)
Ignoring the motives for
one’s suicide[5],
Durkheim focused on "states of the various social environments",
specifically religion, family and state. It is in these realms where suicide
can be objectively analyzed. Generally, they are all main sources of
solidarity; therefore they should all theoretically restraint the practice of
self-murder. On the other hand, suicide rates vary with the level of
integration in these groups, normally higher as it reaches extremes (egoistic,
anomic and altruistic suicide). Some conclusions can be extracted after
describing each realm individually:
Religion[6]:
In a society integrated by mechanical suicide, religion is the determinant instrument
in uniting its members (it creates a collective consciousness), as for when a
society becomes more individualized, religion doesn’t play such a coercive roll
and therefore suicide is higher. At the same time, Durkheim concluded that there
is an evident disparity between religious confessions: Protestants are more likely
to commit suicide than Catholics or Jews. Again by negative evidence, he
posited that this is not because of hostility, or religious confession itself,
but because Protestant permits free inquiry to a greater degree than Catholics
or Jews[7].
Family: As religion, family enjoys a preventive
effect against suicide for both husband and wife (while in marriage alone only
offers immunity for the man). The degree of immunity is proportional to the
family size, which is explained as a consequence of the influence of larger
group on one particular member (intensity of collective consciousness).
Opposing to this idea is the conception of divorce, which not only affects the
probability of suicide for the woman but especially for the man. It is also
worth noting that Comte thought family was the basic organ of society’s body,
in Durkheim’s terms, the main source of solidarity.
State: At an economic level, people of all classes
have about the same rates of suicide, except for the extremely rich and poor.
Still, Durkheim, while referring to state, is more concerned about regulations
and law. Apparently, when these fail because of abrupt disturbances (curiously
not wars[8]),
the individual is left on his own (anomie) in a state of normlessness, no
guidance or constraints. On the other extreme, these regulations can be too
stressed on the individual, which also increases the chances of suicide.
Durkheim concludes his
remarks on Suicide proposing that
these three social environments are no longer capable of containing suicide.
Either they are too distant from the individual or disintegrating at a rapid
rate. The only hope lies on corporations, very collective and occupational
oriented.
[1] In reality, Durkheim reached
this conclusion through negative evidence – demonstrating that it wasn’t
pathological or extra-social, so it had to be social. Suicide, p. 297-299
[2] Encyclopedia of suicide.
[3] “Any death which is the direct
or indirect result of a positive or negative act accomplished by the victim
himself”. Suicide, p.42
[4] The
Encyclopedia of Suicide
[5] Suicide, p. 148-149
[6]
Religion provides experiences that are very real by providing rituals through
which individuals enhance their sense of dependence on a higher power, which
ultimately is society.
[7] “Durkheim had shown that
the prophylactic effect of religion on suicide owed little to its condemnation
of suicide, its idea of God, or its promise of a future life; rather, religion
protects man from suicide "because it is a society. What constitutes this
society is the existence of a certain number of beliefs and practices common to
all the faithful, traditional and thus obligatory. The more numerous and strong
these collective states of mind are, Durkheim concluded, the stronger the
integration of the religious community, and also the greater its preservative
value." From: http://durkheim.uchicago.edu/Summaries/suicide.html#pgfId=796
[8] Social disturbances "rouse
collective sentiments, stimulate partisan spirit and patriotism, political and
national faith alike, and concentrating activity toward a single end, at least
temporarily cause a stronger integration of society." From:
http://durkheim.uchicago.edu/Summaries/suicide.html#pgfId=2814
No comments:
Post a Comment