28-11-2012, 11:34 AM
Durkheim: Division of labor
Durkheim.docx (Size: 17.11 KB / Downloads: 23)
Durkheim: Division of labor
Durkheim claims that the division of labor itself Is a moral phenomenon, rather than economic one. In the study he focus on the moral , legal and political problems of societies as they change from simple , traditional , agrarian systems to modern industrial societies. He suggests that of these two types of society is characterized by different form of social solidarity and by different social systems of morality. Thus division of labor is the study of characteristics of these societies and the types of solidarities found among them he propounded that two types of solidarities , be’ mechanical’ solidarity and ‘organic’ solidarity, can be identified through the types of law in different kinds of social structure.
Mechanical Solidarity:
Mechanical solidarity is sui generis i.e. born in the natural course of events based on resemblances of individuals. It directly links them with the society. This type of solidarity has arisen out of a number of common experiences of like members in a given society.
Mechanical solidarity can be characterized by segmental system in which every segment is homogenous and involved in the social structure. Hence the society is divided into quite small compartments which envelop the individual completely. The segmental social structure is characterized by low degree of interdependence what happens in one segment, hardly has the any effect on other. People do the same type of work they are similar, their inter-dependence is limited their density of interaction is low. Thus this type of society has solidarity of similarity.
Durkheim further says that in this type of society what we have is collective conscience; he defines collective conscience as a set of beliefs and customs which on an average are common in a society and form a determinate system which has its own life style. Homogeneity of experience leads to the collective conscience. This gives rise to common beliefs and practices. It is this kind of collective conscience that binds them beautifully. The social life is blended with religion and economic institutions of such a society are nearer to primitive communism as differentiations are few. Most of the property is commonly owned, the experience are similar, and rules and regulation to relate to common life. The nature of laws is thus collective a wrong does is punished by the collectivity. Penal or repressive law is the indicator of mechanical solidarity. Legal sanctions derived from the penal are directly proportional to the member of social bonds which are regulated and controlled by collective conscience. A wrong against the group is punished on the one hand punished is given to the individual; on the other hand, punishment strengthens the beliefs and values of the society. Any wrong brings injury to the group sentiments every punishments restores the authority of the collectivity.
Organic solidarity:
As the division of labor increase and the new roles are required, there is an increasing differentiation of mils or groupings. At the same time the uniformity of beliefs and moral ideas decreases, but the society does not disintegrate; instead a new form of solidarity, a new form of moral order develops to supplement the weakening influences of common values. This Durkheim calls an ‘organic solidarity ‘. It is characterized by the independence of different elements, with in a general acceptance of the need for differentiation. Here individual depends upon the parts which the society is composed of. In this respect a society is an arrangement of different functions which are linked mutually by social bonds. In this conception the differences among the individuals are visible to the extent that everybody has his specific field of activities and confirm him or herself to those areas only. Hence the individual’s conscience is distinct from the collective conscience. Commonly shared values still perfect because without them these would be no society, but they become generalized, as they are not rooted in the totality of commonly sheared daily experiences.
Organized social structure is thus characterized by high degree of independence. It is no longer solidarity of similarity, but now what we have is solidarity of difference, which means that it is because we are different we are together, therefore it is the solidarity of dependence.