Durkheim

Social Change

• The transition form the old to the new forms of society happens through a change in social bounds (solidarity).

Why is this relevant?

• 1. Describes the normal basis of modern social order, and thus:

• 2. Prescribes the “pathological” conditions of our societies (e.g. class conflict, social disintegration and deregulation (“anomie”

• 3. Explains “abnormal” or deviant behaviors (such as Suicide and Crime)

Changing Divorce Laws:

• In the last 40 years we have had a radical change in divorce law in Canada

• Does this change correspond to a healthy and normal condition of life in our society or– as some would argue– is it pathological and abnormal?

Divorce Law in Canada

Before 1968 1968 1985

adultery was the only

ground for Divorce

No fault groundDivorce is allowed:By joint consent:Three years of

SeparationBy one person’s

Request:Five years of separation

“the marital breakdown”

defined in terms of:Lived apart for

one year

• The change in divorce law, reflects the change in the ways family members are linked in Canada.

Changing Family Institution in Canada

• Two decades ago, married couples made up 80 per cent of families.

• In 2006, that number plunged to 68.6 per cent.

• Couples living together outside of the legal confines of marriage account for 15.5 per cent of all families in Canada.

• Twenty years ago, that figure was only 7.2 per cent.

No Cultural Imperative

• "It really does have a lot to do with the fact that it's much more acceptable to live together before you get married and in a lot of cases, people don't bother getting married because there really isn't any cultural imperative on them to do so," said Kathy Lynn, a certified family educator, speaking with CTV's Canada AM Wednesday.

More Single Parents

• Twenty years ago single parents headed up 12.7 per cent of families.

• Today, single parents make up 15.9 per cent.

More Families Without Children

• For the first time, the 2006 census showed there were more families comprised of couples without children (42.7 per cent) than with children (41.4 per cent).

• Old divorce law New divorce law

-Divorce was perceived -marriage is a

as an act committed contract between two

against the core beliefs consenting individuals

of society -the divorce must

-it was sanctioned in order be allowed based on

to protect these beliefs their consent.

.

• Durkheim defines these two forms of laws in terms of “repressive” and “restitutive” laws.

The Repressive Law

Consists in inflicting physical harm, or depriving the offender of social honour and/or freedom.

The perception of crime

• The offence is perceived as made against

community [against religion, core values etc.]

• The act offends the core beliefs and common norms of society (e.g. divorce and the break up of marriage)

Punishment is harsh

• It is a passionate reaction

• It retaliates in order to reinforce the common norms and beliefs of society (such as belief in the family values)

Restitutive sanctions, [contractual law, private law, civil law]

– The term “restitutive” is derived from “restitution” which means: the return of something to the condition it was in before it was changed

– 1. the return of something to its rightful owner– 2. compensation for a loss, damage

Example:

– You borrow a book from me, and you are expected to return it. If you don’t, the law obliges you to either return it, or pay the damage.

– Thus the Intention is to restore things to their previous state.

– It also restores the principle of exchange or contract which is damaged.

The Punishment Is Lenient

• The perception of damage is not to society but to the individual

• The act not the intention is punished• “The pleader is not disgraced, his honor is

not put in question”• Thus the punishment is lenient: torts, fines,

etc..

The function of the law.

• “the law regulates contractual obligations, by prescribing expectations rather than sentences.”

Laws are external signs of social solidarity

• In Durkheim’s view laws correspond to, and exhibit social bounds (i.e., solidarity in his terms).

The two forms of social solidarity

• These two forms of laws reflect the two ways through which the individuals are linked in society:

1. Mechanical solidarity

2. Organic solidarity

Mechanical Solidarity

• A strong social bond between the segments based on common beliefs, or more precisely based on:

• Collective Conscience:

• The totality of beliefs and sentiments common to average citizens of the same society

Crime and Mechanical Solidarity

• “An act is socially bad because society disproves of it.”

• “If the corresponding sentiments are abolished, the most harmful act to society will not only be tolerated, but even honored and proposed as an example.”

we must not say that an action shocks the common conscience because it is criminal, but rather that it is criminal because it shocks the common conscience. We do not reprove it because it is a crime, but it is a crime because we reprove it.

No individuality

• In societies where this type of solidarity is highly developed, the individual does not appear.

• “The individual is dependent upon the collective type and follows all of its movements.”

Why “mechanical”?

The social molecules (the individuals) … have no actions of their own, as the molecules of inorganic bodies.

Examples of “no individuality”!

• Marriage is arranged by the family

• The roles in the family are predefined (based on gender),

• The divorce is not allowed just because the individuals consent to beak up their marriage.

Organic Solidarity

• It establishes contractual relationships among individuals.

• Example: Marriage today is considered to be a contract.

• It is a result of the development of the division of labor in society.

The extension of the division of labor

• Is a result of the increase of the population, and of the individuals’ contact and interaction.

• People need to find more effective ways of production of goods, and this requires, primarily, the extension of the division of labor.

Dynamic Or Moral Density

• First, (e.g., the growth of cities) – distance between members of a society

reduced spatially

• Second, (the total number of its members). – the increase of population.

• Third, the number and rapidity of ways of communication and transportation.

The consequences of the division of labor:

1. Differentiation: the individuals are placed in increasingly more different functions,

2. Meritocracy: the individuals attain social role and status, based on their functions.

3. Individuation: the individuals become more independent.

4. “organic solidarity”: Individuals become more interdependent

Social roles: Differentiation

• Ideally, every one can play a role of his/her own choice and every one’s identity and personality is determined by his/her social role.

More independence: Individuation

• Who one is does not depend on socially defined and enforced categories such as the family, class, gender, race, etc…

• One’s function in society (e.g. job, profession etc.) is not predetermined by one’s social status (the family, class, etc.)

More interdependence

• Because people depend more on each other for what they need, such as housing, food, health care, education, etc….

Why “organic”?

• “This solidarity resembles that which we observe among the higher animals.”

• Each part has its own independent and different function.

Because of this analogy, we propose to call the solidarity which is due to the division of labor, organic.

Law and Organic Solidarity

• However, even in “organic solidarity” the law is not merely based on the consent and self-interest of the individuals.

• In the example of marriage law

“Although marriage is a contract, the married persons can neither form it nor break it at their pleasure.”

An example of the “rule of law”

• “The judge who examines a request for divorce is not concerned with knowing whether this separation is truly desirable for the married parties, but rather whether the causes …come under … the law.”

if the contract has the power to bind, it is society which gives this power to it.

The function of the law

• In the most advanced societies is:

• “to make social relations always more equitable, so as to assure the free development of all our socially useful forces.

• “there cannot be rich and poor at birth without there being unjust contracts.”

The Forced Division of Labor

• not any kind of social regulation is good, rather sometimes “bad” rules are the source of evil in society.

• Unjust distribution of functions (e.g. when people get education and thus good jobs because they can pay for it), for instance, make lower classes unhappy and give rise to class conflicts and crime.

Anomie

• Anomic derives from anomie which means lack of norms (regulations)

• Nomie in Greek means “law”

• Anomie = when social norms are weak or inadequate

The First Cause of Anomie

• 1. “Sudden and rapid change”• …in economy and thus as time passes

the division of labor will attain its normal form.

• In the first edition of the DOL Durkheim insisted that this is the major cause of anomie and thus societies, as they evolve, will restore a normal DOL

Durkheim’s self-critique

• In the preface to the second edition of DOL, Durkheim argues that his prediction in the first edition was wrong.

• This is because anomie is more deeply involved in the moral fabric of modern societies.

The Second and the real cause of Anomie in modern times

• 2. Weakness of moral commitments to norms

• The assumption:

• “The adherence to laws and justice, requires a degree of sacrifice, a restriction upon individuals self interest.”

The rule of self interest vs. the rule of law

• But today “we are supposed to follow no other rule than that of our well understood interests”

The question:

• Then “how can we learn to depend upon disinterestedness, on self-forgetfulness, on sacrifice?”

The need for a moral authority

• “There must be a superior authority [collective] , in order to impose scarifies in the name of the public interest.”

Modern Moral Authority

• In the old times this “superior authority” was religious in nature.

• “Today the greatest number of citizens, pass their lives in the industrial and commercial world.”

Thus the question is:

• What is this “superior authority” which should replace the religious authority in our times?

Durkheim’s Dilemma:

• By showing that there is a "non-contractual element (i.e. the rule of law) in contract (the rule of self-interest) “ Durkheim had created a dilemma for himself.

• For example:

Marriage and the law

• If marriage is only based on two individuals consent (i.e. on contract) how can we expect them at the same time to allow the law (or the core values of society) to dictate to them when and how they can break their marriage?

• In fact, after the divorce law of 1968 people in order not wait for 3 years of separation used to fake adultery!

• where does the "non-contractual element" derive from if the progress of organic solidarity, entails the disappearance of collective values?

• Durkheim’s final answer is elaborated in his last book, i.e., The Elementary Forms of Religious Life.