The parents of Sociology: Marx and Durkheim
Marx and Durkheim were two of the parents of sociology, both macrosociologos. To understand their approaches, it is important to contextualize them both in Western Europe (Germany and France, respectively) during S. XIX; Therefore, we understand that they are influenced by the industrial revolution, political revolutions such as the French revolution, urban growth in cities and, in general, the change in the organization in new societies also due to the community eclipse (Gemeinschaft ) for society (Gesellschaft), for which – according to Tönnies – the industrial revolution had weakened the family and tradition, promoting individualism. In these circumstances, each of the sociologists developed their theories.
The first difference to highlight from the approach of these authors is that each one is part of a different paradigm. Durkheim, within functionalism, puts its point of view in the regularities and functioning of society, highlighting that society exists beyond ourselves. In reaction to functionalism, the theory of conflict arises, a theoretical framework to which Marx belongs and that states that society is not dominated by balance (as functionalism defends), but by the conflict of interests and inequalities. With which, starting from this different base, we will see the differences between these authors with respect to four points: what the societies have changed, why they change, what keeps them together and where are they going.
Let’s start by analyzing what societies have changed. Marx, having spent much of his life in London, warned first hand the power of the global trade system, since British factories were one of the main production channels. Marx said that walking through the streets of that city, saw the extreme inequalities that there were: while entrepreneurs lived in enviable conditions, the rest of the people, the majority of the population, worked in bad circumstances with a scarce salary. Hence their distinction between capitalists, people who have factories, and proletarians, who do not possess them, but make them work. He realized that society had changed with the establishment of capitalism. On the contrary, Durkheim thought that societies had changed for the division of labor and the passage of mechanical solidarity to organic. The most primitive and pre -industrial societies were characterized by what Durkheim called "collective consciousness", thanks to which the community mobilized as soon as there was a transgression of the norms or values; Therefore, characteristic solidarity was mechanics, by which society remained united thanks to the values, beliefs and a conventional lifestyle. In these pre -industrial societies there was not yet labor division; On the other hand, in industrialists, people no longer care about a shared morality, but about social ties based on work specialization. That is, a new solidarity arises, the organic, through which societies remain cohesive thanks to the high level of interdependence of people.
In the second point, consisting of why societies change, Marx reveals that undoubtedly the economy and class conflict have been the determining factors. He himself said in the Communist Manifesto (1848) that the class struggle was the "engine of history". This class struggle refers to antagonism that has been between the interests of various sectors of society: free and slaves, feudal lords and servants, capitalists and proletarians, rich and poor, etc. There has always been a bad redistribution of wealth. On the other hand, Durkheim does not emphasize any type of conflict, but he focuses on analyzing the division of labor as a key to social change, as well as urbanization. As explained in the Division of Social Work (1893), dynamic density occurs when there is an increase of people in an area (thanks to urbanization processes), so there is a greater interaction between it and, eventually, it will allow The passage from mechanical to organic solidarity.
As for what they keep the United Societies, Marx ensures that the exploitation, conflict and domination relationships from one sector of society to another. The capitalists minimize the wages of the proletarians to maximize the benefits. The only ties that unite the oppressed with the oppressors are those of exploitation. Marx, therefore, considers a model of society that allows it to remain united: it is formed by the infrastructure, constituted by the economic system, and the superstructure, all the institutions that were built on the economic basis.That is, he argued that all parts of a society operate in accordance with the economic system. Durkheim, on the other hand, considered that social cohesion was due to both solidarity already mentioned, mechanical and organic. Likewise, he also gave great importance to criminal acts as a fundamental part of the functioning and union of society, despite the paradoxical that may seem. Durkheim believes that they need to exist, since only by detecting these harmful acts, people will defend a common morality.
Finally, we are asked where societies are directed. Marx is from both sociologists the most optimistic: according to him, workers would inevitably acquire class awareness, that is, the recognition of their union as a class, and abandon the capitalist system. For his part Durkheim, he thought that in the future the anomia would be resolved – attempts of a sufficient moral guide for individuals – and we would lead to a civil society, where all citizens could express their ideas, interests, beliefs, etc.
The truth is that, thanks to the fact that both authors had disparate looks, both approaches influenced modern sociology and have allowed us to give rise to new theories and sociological currents.
Leave feedback