Sociological theory reflection 1 PDF

Preview

Summary

Reflection paper on Durkhiem ...

Description

Reflection Paper- Durkheim: Division of Labor 9/20/20 Emile Durkheim was called the father of sociology. He was a brilliant mind in his time. Studying the social aspect of life, society in itself and giving an empirical approach to sociology as a “natural science” was revolutionary. Based on readings, it was quite evident that Durkheim emphasized a lot about society’s influence on the individual or the collective. He saw society as a whole organism, but most of all he was interested in social facts (more particularly nonmaterial social facts). The first step in Durkheim separating sociology from psychology and philosophy paved the way in establishing sociology as a sound discipline. One of the Durkheim iconic work was the Division of labor. Here, he observed individual relations in society and focused on solidarity in society. Emile Durkheim believed that division labor created a new kind of social morality. His thesis states that division in today’s society is not held together by similarity but it is in the division of task itself that forces each one to depend on each other (Ritzer et al., 2018, p. 201). To him, it is an important piece to the economy and produces a level of morality that produces a feeling of solidarity between two people. Comte on the other hand, had a different view toward the division of labor. He highlights primitive societies sharing common experiences and having more values as a result. He believed that when people in society are operating different tasks, they no longer share similarities, that division reduces solidarity and moral beliefs that are essential to harmony (Ritzer et al., 2018, p. 201). Durkheim proposed two types of solidarities – Mechanical and Organic Solidarity in his study. Mechanical solidarity is characterized by a unified people bonded by similar activities and engagements and is highly religious. In contrast, Organic solidarity describes modern society

held together by differentiations of tasks, responsibilities and is morally individualistic (Ritzer et al., 2018, p. 202). The division of tasks in modern society creates a culture of interdependence. In order to survive, we need the various skills of another person, groups, structures, and institutions. He mentions of the term collective conscience, which is heavily present in primitive societies hence increasing division reduces collective conscience (Ritzer et al., 2018, p. 202). Durkheim believed that the division of labor to be a social fact because it patterns after social interaction. Social facts Durkheim believed to be explainable by other social facts. Durkheim called that transition from mechanical solidarity to organic solidarity, dynamic density, which refers to the concept of the number of people in a society and how often they interact (Ritzer et al., 2018, p. 202). The more people there are the greater competition there are over resources. He said that the issues of dynamic density can be resolve with differentiation in which a new form of social organization is form. Furthermore, Durkheim said that mechanical solidarity is characterized by repressive law and organic solidarity is characterized by restitutive law (Ritzer et al., 2018, p. 203). The positive side of the division of labor is that it creates a new form of moral solidarity, allows interdependence, and forms new types of law based on restitution (Ritzer et al., 2018, p. 203). The negative side is that new kinds of solidarity can give rise to social pathologies. He argued that some things are not pathological because it can be found in other societies (Ritzer et al., 2018, p. 202). He identifies two types of abnormalities that can occur to disrupt the division of labor: anomie division of labor (lack of regulation), force division of labor (outdated norms that are ill suited for someone) and poorly coordinated vision of labor (Specialized functions poorly coordinated; Ritzer et al., 2018, p. 204).

I love Emile Durkheim’s work on the division of labor, and I find it very applicable. The first thing that came to mind after reading this was the rise of the industrial revolution. The family was self-sustaining. Due to industrialization, it altered the role of the family. One of the roles that was significantly impacted, even through the years after, was the role of the woman. Men worked while the women took care of the household forcing them to acquire new gender roles (Major Changes that Occurred in the Family Patterns after Industrialization, 2014). I saw the transition from the family being a self-supplying unit to one where they had to become consumers as what Durkheim referred to as dynamic density. The family was close knitted, where the father, mother and children had similar task and relations. Then at this historical shift roles changed, they had to perform a different task to keep the family as a unit. To go even further, I would describe the woman role at this time as forced division of labor. Moving from a place where you originally provided to being the one provided for. This adjustment can be seen as the years went by on how dissatisfied women became with just being in the household and wanted more freedom. This emphasized the change of norms and traditions that the family used as a systematic way to get by. The only thing I would disagree with in Durkheim’s work is his view on normalizing things that are common in all societies. For example, he classifies crime as normal. Crimes shouldn’t be normal because it clearly shows an abnormality in the division of labor. If the division of labor brings a sense of interdependence where we rely on each other for what we need, then ultimately, society should reflect a strong sense of harmony. I find it contradictory to his claim that the division of labor brings forth a new kind of morality but yet crime should be considered normal. If there are a number of people committing crimes, that clearly shows that

they are not occupying or performing tasks that are relevant to society and thus, it should remain being abnormal. I found it to be a phenomenal work. Reference Ritzer, G., & Stepnisky, J. (2018). The division of Labor. In Classical sociological theory (pp. 200–205). essay, SAGE Publications, Inc. Major Changes that Occurred in the Family Patterns after Industrialization. Your Article Library. (2014, March 25). https://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/sociology/kinship-andfamily/major-changes-that-occurred-in-the-family-patterns-after-industrialization/31300....