 | |
| Author | Émile Durkheim |
|---|---|
Publication date | 1893 |
The Division of Labour in Society (French:De la division du travail social) is the doctoral dissertation of the French sociologistÉmile Durkheim, published in 1893. It was influential in advancingsociological theories and thought, with ideas which in turn were influenced byAuguste Comte. Durkheim described howsocial order was maintained in societies based on two very different forms ofsolidarity –mechanical and organic – and the transition from more "primitive" societies to advancedindustrial societies.
Durkheim suggested that in a "primitive" society,mechanical solidarity, with people acting and thinking alike and with a sharedcollective conscience, is what allows social order to be maintained. In such a society, Durkheim viewedcrime as an act that "offends strong and defined states of the collective conscience" though he viewed crime as a normal social fact.[1] Becausesocial ties are relatively homogeneous and weak throughout a mechanical society, the law has to be repressive andpenal to respond to offences of the common conscience.
In an advanced, industrial,capitalist society, the complex system ofdivision of labour means that people are allocated in society according to merit and rewarded accordingly: social inequality reflects natural inequality, at least in the case that there is complete equity in the society. Durkheim argued thatmoral regulation was needed, as well aseconomic regulation, to maintainorder (ororganic solidarity) in society. In fact this regulation forms naturally in response to the division of labor, allowing people to "compose their differences peaceably".[2] In this type of society, law would be more restitutive than penal, seeking to restore rather than punish excessively.
He thought that transition of a society from "primitive" to advanced may bring about majordisorder,crisis, andanomie. However, once society has reached the "advanced" stage, it becomes much stronger and is done developing. UnlikeKarl Marx, Durkheim did not foresee any different society arising out of the industrial capitalist division of labour. He regarded conflict, chaos, and disorder as pathological phenomena to modern society, whereas Marx highlightsclass conflict.
| Books |  | |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | ||
| Conceptualized and defined | ||
| Related | ||
