Abstract This comparative study of the origins of sociological theory in the work of George Fitzhugh, an American slaveholder, and Emile Durkheim, the French father of sociology, indicates that as a world view the science of sociology bears striking similarity to the science of slavery. Several major areas of sociology: social order, morality, division of labour, and education are developed and analysed by Fitzhugh in the mid-nineteenth century as a defence against the evils of capitalism and a programme to restore the natural moral order of slavery. Durkheim's analyses of these areas one half century later are substantively the same as he analyses the 'pathology' of modern industrialization and the 'normalcy' of nontransitional, stable society. The elevation of Society to the status of a diety is fundamental for both theorists in their defence of moral order. Both sociologists are examples of the development of sociology out of a historical period marked by the chaotic contradictions inherent in the growth of capitalism coexisting with feudalism and slavery around the world. Show
Journal Information For more than 50 years The British Journal of Sociology has represented the mainstream of sociological thinking and research. Consistently ranked highly by the ISI in Sociology, this prestigious international journal publishes sociological scholarship of the highest quality on all aspects of the discipline, by academics from all over the world. The British Journal of Sociology is distinguished by the commitment to excellence and scholarship one associates with its home at the London School of Economics and Political Science. http://www.interscience.wiley.com Publisher Information Wiley is a global provider of content and content-enabled workflow solutions in areas of scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly research; professional development; and education. Our core businesses produce scientific, technical, medical, and scholarly journals, reference works, books, database services, and advertising; professional books, subscription products, certification and training services and online applications; and education content and services including integrated online teaching and learning resources for undergraduate and graduate students and lifelong learners. Founded in 1807, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. has been a valued source of information and understanding for more than 200 years, helping people around the world meet their needs and fulfill their aspirations. Wiley has published the works of more than 450 Nobel laureates in all categories: Literature, Economics, Physiology or Medicine, Physics, Chemistry, and Peace. Wiley has partnerships with many of the world’s leading societies and publishes over 1,500 peer-reviewed journals and 1,500+ new books annually in print and online, as well as databases, major reference works and laboratory protocols in STMS subjects. With a growing open access offering, Wiley is committed to the widest possible dissemination of and access to the content we publish and supports all sustainable models of access. Our online platform, Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) is one of the world’s most extensive multidisciplinary collections of online resources, covering life, health, social and physical sciences, and humanities. Rights & Usage This item is part of a JSTOR Collection. zuletzt aktualisiert am 12. April 2022 von Durkheim sees anomie as a state of social disintegration. Due to a far-reaching social change (here: industrialisation, introduction of the structural principle of division of labour), social differentiations are increasingly emerging (e.g. poor – rich, urban – rural, religious – secularised, etc.). The disappearance of old principles of structure and order weakens social cohesion. As a result, general social rules are no longer observed; the collective order dissolves and a state of anomie emerges. The consequences of this are increased suicide and crime rates.
Main proponentDavid Émile Durkheim TheoryDurkheim’s anomie theory describes the effects of the social division of labor developing in early industrialism and the rising suicide rate. Accordingly, in times of social upheaval, “collective consciousness” is weakened and previous norms, moral convictions and controls dwindle. Old social structural principles, based on the uniformity of the members of society and their lifestyles, are disappearing and are increasingly being replaced by the principle of the division of labour. Here the division of labour is more than an economic principle, but represents the central social value base and enables solidarity among the members of society. Crises in general, suicides or even crimes are signs of social pathological conditions that endanger the new structural principle of the division of labour. A state of anomie (irregularity) is threatening. Durkheim notes that crime has an ubiquitous character, i.e. there was and is no society in which there were no deviations from the norm. In this respect, crime should not initially be understood as a social pathology – in the sense of a fundamental disturbance of the social. On the contrary, crime in modern societies characterized by the division of labor has a function of clarifying the norms. Only through the deviation itself and the sanctioning of the breach of the norm does the validity of the norm become visible to all members of society and confirm its validity. Criminality is therefore functional in a society based on the division of labour and affirms collective consciousness. Only an excess of crime is an indication of a lack of observance of social rules and a dwindling collective consciousness. If deviation in society becomes the rule and hedonistic-egoistic action as well as human instincts take over, there is the danger of an anomie. Implication for Criminal PolicyObviously, according to Durkheim’s theses, the political goal must be to prevent the state of anomie in a society. This is at least possible for the state by successfully communicating values and moral concepts that apply equally to all members of society. If society or the state prescribes a clear and unequivocal standardization, the individual recognizes it and renounces certain desires or severely restricts many of his needs. A prerequisite for this, however, is on the one hand that the members of society accept the content of the norms set and do not only adhere to them out of pure fear of sanctions (this acceptance can, however, only be expected if the distribution of goods in the social structure is not too unequal). On the other hand, the stability of the norm-setting society is a prerequisite: economic or social collapses as well as other changes in times of social change weaken collective consciousness and call into question the moral principles previously shared. In summary, it can be said that, according to Durkheim, the clear and unequivocal communication of social norms on the one hand and the stability of economic and social factors in societies on the other hand can prevent the outbreak of increased crime. Moreover, according to Durkheim, a certain number of deviations are normal and can be found in all societies at all times [see: Durkheim (1895) The rules of the sociological method]. Critical Appraisal & RelevanceDurkeim’s theory is to be appreciated as a social explanation for deviant behaviour at a time when criminology was still in its infancy. Both Durkheim’s explicit reference to the incipient industrialization and the assumption of a moral orientation across society no longer seem contemporary today. Without great effort and imagination, however, two contemporary structural principles of modern societies, such as economization and globalization, could be named that are the cause of an unequal distribution of socio-economic resources and can thus also be the cause of a state of anomie. Moreover, anomie is only useful for Durkheim as an explanation for excessive crime and suicide rates, whereas everyday crime and its causes are not addressed at all. LiteraturePrimary literature
Secondary literature
VideoWhat concept did Durkheim use to refer to social bonds which are strong among members of industrial society and are based on specialization and mutual interdependence?Organic solidarity is social cohesion based upon the dependence individuals have on each other in more advanced societies. It comes from the interdependence that arises from specialization of work and the complementarities between people.
What concept did Durkheim use to refer social bonds?Simpler societies, in which people do roughly similar things, are held together by very strong collective beliefs which take on a sacred aura. Durkheim called this kind of social bond “mechanical solidarity.” As the division of labor increases the collective consciousness weakens and becomes more abstract.
When a society provides little moral guidance to individuals that means anomie?The term anomie (sometimes translated anomia) has been coined by the French sociologist Emile Durkheim (1897). In sociology, it refers to a condition in which society provides little moral guidance to individuals.
Which of the following concept refers to people who interact in a defined territory and share culture?According to sociologists, a society is a group of people with common territory, interaction, and culture. Social groups consist of two or more people who interact and identify with one another.
|
Which of the following concepts was used by Durkheim to name a condition in which society provides little moral guidance to individuals?
zusammenhängende Posts
Urheberrechte © © 2024 berikutyang Inc.
