David Emile Durkheim was born on April 15, 1858 in Lorraine, France. He was born into a Jewish family, whose father and grandfather held the office of Rabbi. (De Sociologia, p. 1) During his academic years, Durkheim became known as an outstanding intellect, receiving various awards for his academics and attending one of the most prestigious schools in France, which was called the Ecole Normale. Great minds were trained in this school as some of the greatest philosophers, intellectuals and political figures were trained. (De Sociologia, p. 1) While there, his interest in social phenomena moved. After graduating from school, he took a scholarly position in Bordeaux and taught social science. He also developed such books as Rules of Sociological Method, Division of Labor and Elementary Religious Life. His philosophy and interest in understanding how society is interconnected led him to become the founder of modern sociology. (On Sociology, page 1) Durkheim emphasized sociology as the science of social development over other sciences.
Durkheim’s philosophy
One of Durkheim’s theories focused on how society is interconnected, supporting its honor and stability. Durkheim “… was one of the first people to explain the existence and quality of the different parts of society, according to the function they served to maintain a healthy and balanced society – a condition that recognized functionalism.” (De Sociologia, p. 2.) Functionalism is a system connected and maintained not by vital links, but by the duties of the parts to each other and to the whole. A company’s responsibility is what it contributes to society as a whole. According to functionalism, the main task of sociology is to study such relationships.
At this time (in 1800) a naturalistic vision of society appeared. Human things had natural causes. There have been limited attempts to understand human social systems. Human social struggles (that is, war, marital satisfaction) can be attributed to social conditions. Social scientists tend to find answers to human social problems in the very nature of man and his relationship with others. One of the representatives of this opinion that was raised by individualism was Emile Durkheim. From Durkheim’s perspective, the causes of social situations cannot be understood within a closed vacuum without the context in which it occurs. His views were controversial since it was common for scientists to discuss the causes of conflict, and to place an emphasis on individualism. But man’s existence cannot be viewed in isolation, but within social systems. This view contradicts individualism because it falls within the web of human social relations. In other words, Durkheim examined the social order, “… not in which the actions of individual people … but rather in the , which he wanted to describe as phenomena which have an existence in themselves and are not bound to the actions of individuals” (De Sociologia, p. 1).
In the realm of religion, Durkheim attributes sacred principles to social rather than religious issues. Durkheim pointed out that religion is the first form of sociology. Although Durkheim grew up in the orthodox Jewish religion, he was an agnostic at the time. However, despite this mindset, Durkheim’s thought process interpreted morality as a symbolic representation of social forces. In other words, the foundation of religion and ethics exists in the common mind of society, not in the private thoughts of men.
Durkheim’s interpretation of religion was indeed controversial at the time. However, what is surprising about Durkheim is how he was able to establish the nature of social order and its moral implications. Since moral and religious thought were principles closely connected, primitive religious thought seemed interesting to its sociologists. In today’s society, the relationship between moral order and religious practice is tenuous, but this does not diminish the power of examining morality as a means of understanding human social nature.
“But if there is one thing that history has irrefutably demonstrated, the morality of each people is directed to the social structure of the people exercising it. The connection is so intimate that, when the character of morality is generally observed. A given society and excluding abnormal and pathological cases, it is possible to gather the nature of that society, its elements it is organized in a structured way” (Durkheim, 1961, p. 87).
In his work entitled Division of Labor in Society, Durkheim “concentrated on the division of labor and examined how it differed in established societies and modern societies”. (De Sociologia, p. 2) In a society that focuses on capitalism, Durkheim assessed how individualism can be sustained. Durkheim points out that “… it is necessary that the collective consciousness leave the place of the individual consciousness, so that specific functions are established which cannot be controlled”. (Durkheim and Weber, 1).
“Does it matter to the sociologist? Since suicide is an individual action affecting only the person, it seems necessary that it depends only on the individual, thus belonging only to psychology. Isn’t the purpose of suicide usually explained by its complex, antecedent behavior and private history? (p. 46)
However, Durkheim suggested that extra social factors could have an effect on suicide. Perhaps climate or seasonal changes could determine if self-destruction occurs. Another proposal for suicide can be that individuals feel so closely connected with society and closely connected with social groups, to the extent that they give their lives for it. He considered this type of suicide as altruistic suicide.
Another way in which he related death to social systems is in the state of anomie in which there exists “… the rupture of the social norms controlling behavior. From the state of anomie all forms
