Durkheim's Philosophy About Types of Solidarity and Modern Society
Modernity is closely linked to the ethos of philosophical and aesthetic modernism where political and intellectual currents intersect with the enlightenment which was the cradle of modernity and subsequently, the founding principle of Durkheim’s sociology the sui generis between the human individual and society. Modernity the epoch of sociology and was broken down into four key components which developed consequences as diverse as Marxism, Existentialism and other means of social sciences at the time modernity was developed.
This also encompasses the social relations associated with the rise of capitalism, followed by the shifts in attitudes associated with secularization in post-industrial life. We address Durkheim’s theory of modernity in this essay where his concerns, for example the divisions of labour in society will be looked at in further detail.
Durkheim focused on the theory that a new type of solidarity emerged in modern social life. He compares and splits these theories in to two individual periods, collective consciousness 1966 “defuses every reach of society” into valued groups where it has supremacy over individuals with social order which Durkheim consequently called this Mechanical solidarity.
These are very important as it underlines Durkheim’s collective consciousness. Failure to comply with the “unforgiving moral codes” of the collective conscious would lead to harsh punishments which were guided by a “repressive law” which underlay mechanical solidarity. Durkheim didn’t accept that this moral code was enough to understand social organisation. This was one his main concerns that then pushed him to picture a brand-new form of solidarity to socialise this theory in modern days society. Durkheim called this Organic solidarity.
Due to industrialisation and the speciality of jobs also with his response in context from this great transfiguration agrarian, to the industrial town working in large mills, and coal mines, these were but a few. Also, with the ongoing of individualism in the workforce and the increased divisions of labour. Where modern individuals are based on a specific cut by developing a new normative conception of Autonomy. To understand the novelty of Durkheim’s sociology. The science of man also the divisions of labour and the enlightening forms of religious life this he composes that there is society and, in the individual, with this society is a true form of destructive attributes. Durkheim believed morals were in the decline and that as the workforce grew due to industrialisation, populations grew with it.
Other sociologists’ theories i.e. Merton emphasised that these morals norms and values would decrease with the increased size of the ‘densely populated’ towns. The only answer that Durkheim had to modern society today has missing elements, these elements are family and stare moral.
This automatous society would overcome the anaemic conditions in modern society. With this further research on modernity he takes society to the next level and proposed that individuals themselves would have to establish social norms and values to become fully autonomous people which is required in modernity’s society. Practical independence in division as Giddens 1971 prepares for a new form of solidarity, which means that modernisation which includes individualism and independence in the workforce could then be subjected to Durkheim’s theory of mechanical solidarity. Despite this, to address Durkheim’s theory of modernity, we can now look at a different approach demoralisation, Anomy. This is related to organic solidarity; this theory is defined as normlessness.
Durkheim’s theory of this is of a society where regulations are absent. The sociologist worried approached this definition as a crisis of society which cannot control the major fluctuations in modern life. He also stated that social facts are a fact of nature which come with modernity. Durkheim mutually relates suicides and anomie committed in the 19th century. To underline the suicide rates, and so relates to the religious groups for the examination of Christian groups where suicides are very much higher in catholic and protestant groups.
These two religious groups criticize the old-fashioned rule of Christianity. Therefore, it becomes apparent that this is integrant of the manor protestants against the new atmosphere of modernity. In contrast Durkheim struggles to understand and questioned the anatomical structure that would push Protestants to have a larger suicide rate than Catholics who seem fatalistic among the social problems in society. Thereupon studies show the connections between modernity, anomie, organic solidarity also suicides which display a consistent theoretical background in his work. This then attributed to his methodological position that he had in society. Durkheim’s theory of modern society was to prioritise rules over individualism, to override personal private considerations in society.
Overall, Durkheim and his sociology theory represents modernity which focuses on individuals lives while always addressing social sciences, taking society in its larger scale, which established a new kind of solidarity which reflects on modern day social, religious and economical situations. Durkheim was concerned about larger scaled problems that would appear in modern day society in Europe. He believed that there had to be some sort of glue that holds us together as a society, such as family values and norms, but with industrialisation these traditions were being ripped apart by the birth of modernity. Now he observed that these community consistent values were on the decline due to increased division of labour. With the need to keep society safe and to be able to solve the current problems that this may cause.
