EMILE DURKHEIM(1858-1917)EMILE DURKHEIM(.docx

EMILE DURKHEIM
(1858-1917)
EMILE DURKHEIM
(1858-1917)
I. Biography
Born April 15, 1958 in Epinal, France
Jewish, came from a long line of rabbis
Studies Talmud; rejects religion as outmoded but
recognizes the role is plays in creating solidarity in
society and in regulating people
EMILE DURKHEIM
Biography, Cont’d
Eventually becomes agnostic and decides on a secular
career

Later studies religion from an agnostic perspective
Maintains ties to his family and religious community,
despite agnosticism
1879-- Enters Ecole Normale Superieur in Paris (a very
prestigious college)
Becomes interested in a scientific approach to
studying society
–Goes against the philosophical approach of the
college and the times
EMILE DURKHEIM
Biography, Cont’d
1882–graduates Ecole Normale Superieur
Because his ideas differ from the dominant ways of thinking
about society in France at the time, he can’t find a job
1885–Moves to Germany to further his studies in the scientific
method and how to use it to study society
1887–Returns to Bordeaux, France and is appointed Head of
Courses on Teaching and the Social Sciences, effectively
becoming Chair of the first Sociology Department in France.
Advocates the use of scientific method to study and develop
better teaching methods

EMILE DURKHEIM
Biography, Cont’d
1887–Marries Louise Dreyfus, later has one son, Andre and one
daughter, Marie.
1893–Publishes The Division of Labor in Society
1895–Publishes The Rules of Sociological Method
1897–Publishes Suicide: A Study in Sociology
1899–Establishes France’s first sociological journal, L’Annee
Sociologique
EMILE DURKHEIM
Biography, Cont’d
1902–Appointed Charge du Cours (Head of Courses) at the
Sorbonne
1906–Made a Full Professor, appointed Chair of the department
Science of Education and Sociology at the Sorbonne
1912–Published The Elementary Forms of Religious Life
1916–Son Andre is killed on the Belgian front in WWI
1917–Suffered a stroke and several months later died

EMILE DURKHEIM
II. Major Contributions to Sociology
Considered by many to be the founder of sociology
Established a positivist scientific method in sociology
Established sociology as an academic discipline
His work continues to be followed by scholars interested in
deviance, crime, family, education, and religion
Seeks to understand what holds society together and how.
EMILE DURKHEIM
III. Biographical and Historical Influences
A. Religious influences:
Jewish, lived in Alsace-Lorraine region of France;
early in his life Jews were tolerated;
later, in 1870s, France entered the Franco-Prussian War,
when Napoleon III invaded Prussia & lost,
Jews were scapegoated & persecuted
--Durkheim becomes interested in in-group solidarity and the
conditions under which it becomes stronger
EMILE DURKHEIM

III. Biographical and Historical Influences, cont’d
B. Political--the political unrest in France during his lifetime
led Durkheim to question the moral foundations of society;
Durkheim asks: What holds society together, giving it a
feeling of unity?
EMILE DURKHEIM
III. Biographical and Historical Influences, cont’d
C. Rapid Industrialization & Urbanization–breakdown of close
social order of pre-industrial era;
urbanization displaced the moral unity and order of the small
town communities of Durkheim's childhood
Durkheim concludes old moral order needs to be replaced by a
new moral order;
--he distrusts self-interest (against Adam Smith) & believes that
morality is based on a concern for the common good.
EMILE DURKHEIM
IV. Intellectual Roots
A. Enlightenment Philosophers–
Adopts ideas of individual freedoms, democracy, scientific
rationality, and secularism.
Does not favor returning to a simpler time, as Rousseau did, but

opposes rapid, revolutionary change, as Marx, Voltaire, and
others did.
Today he is often considered conservative because he seeks to
understand social problems, how to predict and control them
EMILE DURKHEIM
1. Immanuel Kant–what is moral?
Kant believed that moral decisions should not be based
on “enlightened self-interest”
Instead “morality” meant first fulfilling one’s social
obligations and only then pursuing one’s personal
interests.
--Society before the individual
EMILE DURKHEIM
2. Utilitarians (e.g., Thomas Hobbes, Jeremy Bentham, John
Stuart Mill, Adam Smith)-- Society = the sum of individuals
Morality = the promotion of the greater happiness or good for
the greater number of individuals (Bentham)
–Adam Smith promotes the idea of enlightened self-interest

--when people pursue their own self-interests, the result will be
the greater good for the greater number, and this is good for
society
EMILE DURKHEIM
Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) – Utilitarian, cousin of Charles
Darwin
Adopts the idea that individuals competing in society result in
the “survival of the fittest”
Overlooks the structural and cultural constraints that keep some
locked in poverty
*Assumes wealthiest are “fittest,” even though most of the
wealthiest did nothing to achieve their wealth
*Ignores the hard work that most poor people do
Note: Such beliefs are a foundation for fiscal conservatism in
the United States.
EMILE DURKHEIM

-Durkheim is anti-utilitarian:
Believes society exists sui generis –in a category by itself; is
greater than the sum of individuals with an independent
existence
b. Believes in individual rights as long as they do not conflict
with societal needs
c. Agrees with Kant's idea that the rights of individuals are
connected with their membership in society
--thus individual rights are connected with responsibility to the
group
[Note: This idea is a foundation today for social conservatism
and liberalism in the U.S.]
EMILE DURKHEIM
3. Thomas Hobbes–society is based on a “social contract”–an
agreement among individuals to limit some freedoms to gain
others
(E.g., Agree to limit their freedom to take whatever they want
to gain the freedom from fear of robbery, burglary, or assault.)
EMILE DURKHEIM
--Durkheim says social solidarity must precede the social

contract, since there are 2 elements of the contract
a. That we agree to enter a contract; and
b. That we first agree to abide by our agreement--that
trust or solidarity must first exist
EMILE DURKHEIM
Solidarity as the basis of the social contract is created through
social rituals and is reflected through totems--symbols of what
is sacred to us
--Solidarity-- a sense of belonging to a group/society
–Solidarity is a foundation of our collective beliefs
EMILE DURKHEIM
B. Psychology--developed the idea of individual consciousness
& used scientific method to study it;
--From this Durkheim develops the idea of the common or
collective consciousness— the collective beliefs of a society,
greater than the sum of individual consciousnesses, and needs to
be studied as a separate phenomenon
*

EMILE DURKHEIM
V. Theoretical Framework: PositivismOntology–Realism–The
assumption that social order is an independent entity
Society exists sui generis —is a category in its own right
Durkheim is interested in “social facts”—aspects of social life
that are common throughout society and that influence behavior
e.g., law, demographic shifts, economy, division of labor
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
V. Theoretical Framework: Positivism
2. Epistemology –Durkheim says study “social facts”–events,
trends, and social forces that exist outside of individuals
Developed structural positivism, examining through empirical
evidence the impact of institutions and forces outside the
individual on group behavior
And the comparative method-- the researcher looks at the
conditions under which a phenomenon occurs and then
compares it with the conditions under which it rarely occurs;
then draws inferences or conclusions about causality

3. Level of abstraction that is desirable–nomothetic--grand scale
theories with high levels of abstraction
4. Goals–To predict and control social problems
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
VII. The Rules of Sociological Method
Durkheim is credited for creating sociology as an academic
discipline and for recognizing that the methods used in the
natural and physical sciences could be used to study society.
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
VI. Major Ideas:Defined society is a distinct form of reality--
society forms a reality in and of itself, not reducible to its
component parts or to its individual members.Society exists sui
generis —in a category by itself
C. Society has an a priori existence– it exists independently
of those living in the society or independently of the social
institutions in a society

*
EMILE DURKHEIM
Three key points:Sociology is a distinct field of study that
focuses on society and social facts to explain human
behavior;The methods of the natural sciences can be used to
study society;Sociology is distinct from psychology;
Sociology focuses on social facts —forces outside
individuals and groups; psychology focuses on individual
psyches and the brain
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
Sociology focuses on social facts —forces outside individuals
and group psyches and the brain
social facts— identifiable by the following traits:
1.General or common throughout society, existing
outside of individuals;
2. Capable of exercising control over behavior;
3. Usually pre-exist and outlive members of society

*
EMILE DURKHEIM
Some examples of social facts:
*Collective consciousness/beliefs—norms, folkways,
mores;
*Language, which shapes how we understand the world
*Law—which codifies some of our collective beliefs
*Customs and traditions
*Religion
*Demographic trends
*Technology, which may open or close opportunities to us
*Levels and types of social solidarity
*Collective currents-- the “great movements of
enthusiasm, indignation, and pity in a crowd” that do not
start with any one individual
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
We are often completely unaware of how social facts control us

until we try to defy their control.
“In the case of purely moral maxims; the public conscience
exercises a check on every act which offends it by means of the
surveillance it exercises over the conduct of citizens, and the
appropriate penalties at its disposal. In many cases the
constraint is less violent, but nevertheless it always exists. If I
do not submit to the conventions of society, if in my dress I do
not conform to the customs observed in my country and in my
class, the ridicule I provoke, the social isolation in which I am
kept, although in an attenuated form, the same effects as a
punishment in the strict sense of the word.” (p. 102)
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
Durkheim sums it up this way,
“Here, then, is a category of facts with very distinctive
characteristics: it consists of ways of acting, thinking, and
feeling, external to the individual, and endowed with a power of
coercion, by reason of which they control him.” (p. 102)
Where does the control come from? “…since their source is not
in the individual, their substratum can be no other than society.”
(p. 102)
*

EMILE DURKHEIM
Durkheim concludes that sociologists should study these “facts”
that exist outside of individuals.
We should work to discover the external forces that shape and
control our lives.
We should work to show correlations between two or more
types of social fact.
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
The Normal and the Pathological (A subsection of The Rules)
Crime (and deviance) is inevitable in all societies because it
marks the moral boundaries in a society and communicates to
members of society what behaviors are acceptable and which
are unacceptable
Crime asserts the collective beliefs on which its
definition is based
Even in an idyllic perfect society, some behaviors will be
defined as deviant

*
EMILE DURKHEIM
Crime and deviance are important facilitators of social change
As crimes and deviance become evident, the collective
consciousness (shared beliefs) of a society can change
e.g., child abuse, spouse abuse, civil rights for people
of color; same-sex sexual activity, expressions of gender
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
“Crime is, then, necessary; it is bound up with the fundamental
conditions of social life, and by that very fact it is useful,
because these conditions of which it is a part are themselves
indispensable to the normal evolution of morality and law.” (p.
107)

*
EMILE DURKHEIM
VIII. The Division of Labor in Society
Deviance includes everything from violations of norms
(both folkways and mores) to acts committed that violate laws
(crime and taboos)
The stronger the level of solidarity and the stronger the
collective consciousness, the more acts will be considered
deviant, with punishments swifter and harsher than in
societies with lower levels of solidarity and weaker C.C.
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
“If the collective conscience is stronger, if it has enough
authority practically to suppress these divergences, it will also
be more sensitive, more exacting; and, reacting against the
slightest deviations with the energy it otherwise displays only
against more considerable infractions, it will attribute to them
the same gravity as formerly to crimes. In other words, it will
designate them as criminal.” (p. 107) (From The Rules…)
*

EMILE DURKHEIM
Durkheim believes that societies’ level of solidarity progress
from stronger to weaker.
To examine this he looks at the division of labor as a social fact
and then correlates that with a level of solidarity and that to
crime and punishment
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
The Division of Labor in Society
1. In pre-modern, horticultural and agrarian societies, there was
a low division of labor—people all did essentially the same
jobs, with divisions based primarily in gender and age
2. Societies with a low division of labor tend to have what
Durkheim conceptualized as mechanical solidarity—a feeling
that everyone was the same
*

EMILE DURKHEIM
The feeling of likeness or sameness resulted in a unified
collective consciousness and very strong solidarity.
3. In modern societies there is a high division of labor— people
carry out numerous jobs and roles and are very different from
one another
4. Societies with a high division of labor tend to have a more
diverse collective consciousness and organic solidarity— where
each person is interdependent though the feeling of solidarity
and belonging is weaker
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
5. Societies with mechanical solidarity are very exacting about
crime and deviance.
Everyone is to respect the group, and those who deviate or
offend the group are punished quickly and severely
Durkheim called the system of justice “repressive law”—crimes
are considered to be against the group, and punishments are
swift and severe

*
EMILE DURKHEIM
6. Societies with a high division of labor and organic solidarity
still have criminal codes, but deviance is more tolerated, and
crimes are considered to be against individuals, not the entire
society.
Restitutive law —designed to restore justice to the victim of
crime is practiced
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
La Suicide— Durkheim’s study, Suicide
People think of suicide as an intensely personal act.
Durkheim wanted to study how social facts affected rates of
suicide between societies, historical periods, and groups of
people within a society
He demonstrates that individual pathologies (e.g., depression)
are often rooted in social conditions

*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
La Suicide— Durkheim’s study, Suicide
Suicide rates are highest in places or eras where people lack or
have too much integration and moral regulation.
Durkheim argues that there is a balance between the individual
and society that must be kept
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
Variations occur in correlation with two variables:
Level of integration—membership of individuals in social
groups; identification with social groups
Level of regulation—the ways in which individuals are bound to
the group through rituals and routine expectations

*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
Egoism occurs when individuals are not well-integrated into
society
e.g., are not married, don’t have children, aren’t
employed, don’t belong to groups
The individual self has too much freedom and
becomes self-destructive
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
Anomie—a sense of normlessness—occurs when individuals are
not regulated by society
People may be integrated (e.g., belong to a church; have
a job) but lack the regulation that comes with routine and
ritual demands

e.g., I may belong to a church but only go on
high holidays; I may have a job but work from home and
have few demands on me
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
Durkheim argues that both egoism and anomie are chronic in
modern societies
We are not well-integrated; we put individual needs before
societal needs; we don’t join in
We lack the moral regulation that comes from rituals
that are common in some religions; we lack
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
Egoistic suicide rates are higher among people who lack
integration into society—people feel isolated and morally adrift
When people are poorly integrated, they do not have
society to sustain them

Suicide rates are higher among single, divorced, and
widowed people than among married people
Higher among unemployed than employed people
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
Anomic suicide rates are higher among people who lack
regulation
Regulation comes from rituals, routines, and other
constraints
*Jews—highest rituals, lowest suicide rates
*Catholics—mid-level of ritual, middle suicide rates
*Protestants—lowest rituals, highest suicide rates of the
three groups
*
EMILE DURKHEIM

IX. La Suicide
You might think about what hypothesis you would offer
regarding the suicide rates of Muslims or Atheists if all other
factors (e.g., marriage, employment, etc.) were controlled
What hypothesis would you offer regarding people who have
been married and divorced several times?
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
Durkheim is also interested in what happens when people are
overly-integrated into a society
--When they identify with the society and place its
needs before its own
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
Altruism is an unselfish regard for or devotion to others
e.g., jumping into a rushing river to save a drowning
person

Altruistic suicide rates are higher in small societies where there
is mechanical solidarity
e.g., among Native Americans or First Nation people (e.g.,
Inuit) who are known to commit suicide when they are no
longer useful; suicide bombers
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
Fatalism is an acceptance of the inevitable, a belief in fate
Fatalistic suicide rates are higher in groups where regulation of
individuals is oppressive
Durkheim mentioned this only in a footnote
e.g., Rates of suicide among slaves, oppressed people
(e.g., suicide attempts by prisoners at Guantanamo Bay)
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
He wants to know why suicide rates are lower in small rural
communities and higher in large urban centers.

Small societies tend to have mechanical solidarity with
adequate integration into the social order and adequate moral
regulation
Large urban societies have organic solidarity and lack
adequate integration and moral regulation
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
------------------
Fatalistic Suicide Anomic Suicide
----------------- gration
Altruistic Suicide Egoistic Suicide
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
VI. Major Ideas:
In times of financial crisis, it is not poverty, per se, that results
in higher rates of suicide, but the anomie—lack of norms to
guide and regulate behavior—that occurs

Durkheim argues that poverty and limited means are buffers
against suicide because they regulate our aspirations.
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
He wants to know why suicide rates are lower in small rural
communities and higher in large urban centers. Why modern
societies have higher suicide rates than traditional societies
Small societies tend to have mechanical solidarity with
adequate integration into the social order and adequate moral
regulation
Large urban societies have organic solidarity and lack
adequate integration and moral regulation
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
IX. La Suicide
Durkheim has been criticized for over-simplifying modern and
traditional societies

There is also co-linearity (overlap) between regulation and
integration
*
Travis Hirschi: Social Control Theory
Sidebar:
In Durkheim’s theory of suicide, we can see how being involved
in groups and following routines buffers us against suicide.
Durkheim thought that participating in religious rituals
created solidarity and made people want to go along with the
conscience collective of their society.
*
Sidebar:
Travis Hirschi (1935- ) developed “social control theory” by
building on some of Durkheim’s ideas
In 1969, Hirschi theorized that there are four social factors that
insulate people from becoming involved in criminal behavior.
(See
https://lumen.instructure.com/courses/199939/pages/Section7-
17 )

*
Sidebar:
Those four factors are as follows:Attachment—our connections
to others. When we are attached to people who follow the rules
of society, we worry about what they will think of
us.Commitment—the investments we make in the community. If
we’re known in the community by the work (or volunteer work
we do), we have more to lose than someone who doesn’t.
*
Sidebar:
3. Involvement—participating in groups and organizations. Kids
who belong to clubs or play sports are less likely to commit
crimes than those who don’t.
4. Belief—if we believe in the legitimacy of the rules and laws
we’re more likely to follow them, even when no one is looking
*

I see strong connections between Durkheim’s theory of suicide
and its focus on integration, regulation, rituals, and the
conscience collective and Hirschi’s theory.
The connections between rituals, solidarity, and the collective
consciousness and Hirschi’s theory will become clearer.
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
X. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life
Durkheim sees religious (and secular) ceremonies as ways of
worshipping social life and what people in a society hold to be
sacred (i.e., beyond the everyday world)
Religion goes beyond the worship of supernatural
deities; it worships society itself
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
He divides religion into rituals and beliefs
Rituals are highly routinized acts that provide a common focus

that unites people despite their differences
e.g., Communion, Friday Prayers, Marking the
Sabbath, Pledge of Allegiance, National Anthem
Rituals build solidarity—they are common experiences that bind
us together
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
Symbols are objects that stand for or represent something else
Symbols show membership in a group
e.g., Cross, Crucifix, Star of David,
Crescent moon and star
“Without symbols, social sentiments could have only precarious
existence.” (123)—They solidify the conscience collective.
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
Through ritual interaction, aspects of the group become sacred –

those aspects of the group that are extraordinary and “above and
beyond” the everyday life world
Durkheim refers to the everyday aspects of life as
profane—the mundane aspects of day to day life
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
Religion emerges as groups feel the collective current of
interaction and feel it as something exterior to themselves.
Collective current —a surge of emotion that runs through a
crowd
The collective current then turn the sacred aspects of
the community into symbols that represent the group
and their membership in it
Put simply: God is in the gathering and is nothing more than the
sacred essence of society
*

EMILE DURKHEIM
XI. Other Major Ideas:
Durkheim theorized that getting children and adults integrated
into schools and later work, into religious organizations, and
other groups, in addition to belonging to their families, would
provide the integration and regulation needed to prevent them
from engaging in deviant and criminal acts.
*
EMILE DURKHEIM
XI. Other Major Ideas:
In these groups, children would learn the conscience collective
of their culture.
Through ritual interaction, they would build the solidarity and
moral cohesion with the group that would make them want to
follow the rules.
Only when that fails, Durkheim argued, should a society need to
turn to punishment
*

Assignm ent 4
Soc 320
A to A- (100-88) B+ to B- (87-80) C+ to C- (79-70) D+ to F
(69-0)
Part 1-Explanation of
theory and concepts
80 points
Clearly, accurately,
com pletely, and
precisely explains
Durkheim ’s ontology,
epistem ology, and
goals, his theory of
suicide, including all
concepts called for in
the assignm ent
guidelines. Provides
original exam ples (not

given in class) and not
tied to the assignm ent
to add clarity, depth,
breadth and
elaboration.
80....72
com pletely, and
precisely explains
Durkheim ’s ontology,
epistem ology, and
goals, his theory of
suicide, including all
concepts called for in
the assignm ent
guidelines. Provides
exam ples to add
clarity, depth, and

breadth and
elaboration.
71...64
Clearly and accurately
explains Durkheim ’s
ontology, epistem ology, and
goals, his theory of suicide,
including all concepts called
for in the assignm ent
guidelines. Provides som e
exam ples to add clarity.
Explanation is accurate and
com plete but lacks depth,
breadth, clarity, and/or
precision.
63...56
Unclear,
inaccurate,

and/or
incom plete
explanation of
the theories and
concepts.
Accurate and
precise
exam ples are
lacking.
55... 0
Part 2–Presentation
of Data
20 points
Provides a very “thick
description” of the
people whose lives you
w ill analyze, including
inform ation about

integration, regulation,
ritual involvem ent,
m oral cohesion, social
solidarity, and belief in
the collective
consciousness of the
groups to w hich they
belonged.
20...18
Provides a fairly “thick
description” of the
people whose lives
you will analyze,
including inform ation
about integration,
regulation, ritual
involvem ent, m oral
cohesion, social

solidarity, and belief
in the collective
consciousness of the
groups to w hich they
belonged.
17...16
Provides a less than “thick
description”of the people
w hose lives you w ill analyze,
including inform ation about
integration, regulation,
ritual involvem ent, m oral
cohesion, social solidarity,
and belief in the collective
consciousness of the groups
to which they belonged.
15...14
Provides a weak

description of
the people
w hose lives you
w ill analyze,
including
incom plete
inform ation
about
integration,
regulation, ritual
involvem ent,
m oral cohesion,
social solidarity,
and belief in the
collective
consciousness of
the groups to
w hich they

belonged.
13...0
Part 3–Analysis of
Data
80 points
com pletely, and with
depth and precision
uses the theories and
concepts to explain
how the individuals
and com pletely w ith
som e depth uses the
theories and concepts
to explain how the
individuals whose
Clearly, accurately, and

com pletely uses the theories
and concepts to explain how
the individuals whose lives
you analyze becam e
involved in or avoided
Less than
accurately &
com pletely,
lacking clarity,
depth, and/or
precision, uses
w hose lives you
analyze becam e
involved in or avoided
becom ing involved in
deviant activities.
Connects each of the

concepts with tw o or
m ore exam ples from
the data. Provides an
accurate, com plete,
and logical explanation
for why each person
engaged in or avoided
deviant behavior.
80...72
lives you analyze
becam e involved in or
avoided becom ing
involved in deviant
activities. Connects
each of the concepts
w ith tw o or m ore
exam ples from the
data. Provides an

accurate, com plete,
and logical
explanation for why
each person engaged
in or avoided deviant
behavior.
71...64
becom ing involved in
deviant activities. Connects
each of the concepts w ith
two or m ore exam ples from
the data. Provides an
accurate, com plete, and
logical explanation for why
each person engaged in or
avoided deviant behavior.
63...56
the theories &

concepts to
explain how the
individuals
w hose lives you
analyze becam e
involved in or
avoided
becom ing
involved in
deviant
activities.
Connects each
of the concepts
w ith tw o or
m ore exam ples
from the data.
Provides an
accurate,

com plete, and
logical
explanation for
w hy each
person engaged
in or avoided
deviant
behavior.
55 ... 0
Part 4--Conclusions
10 points
Policy Implications
(see below)
10 points
Draws theoretical
conclusions that follow
logically from your
data and analysis (or

additional adequate and
relevant data are
provided to explain the
deviant and non-
deviant activity of each
person. The argument
is logical and clear and
is well-supported by
data.
10 9
Draws theoretical
conclusions that
follow logically from
your data and analysis
(or additional
adequate and
relevant data are
provided to explain

the deviant and non-
deviant activity of
each person. The
argum ent is logically
w eak or only fairly
supported by data.
8.5 8
Draws theoretical
conclusions that follow
som ew hat logically from
your data and analysis (or
additional adequate and
relevant data are provided
to explain the deviant and
non-deviant activity of each
person. The argum ent uses
w eak logic and is fairly
supported by data.

7.5 7
Draw s
theoretical
conclusions that
do not follow
logically from
your data and
analysis (or
additional
adequate and
relevant data
are provided to
explain the
deviant and
non-deviant
activity of each
person. The
argum ent is

illogical or is not
supported by
data.
6.5 . . .0
Clearly and logically
identifies policy
implications based on
the data and analysis.
Suggests social
programs that are
logically based on
theory and analysis of
data.
10 9
Logically identifies
policy implications
based on the data and

analysis. Suggests
social programs that
are logically based on
theory and analysis of
data.
8.5 8
Clearly and logically
identifies policy implications
based on the data and
analysis OR suggests social
programs that are logically
based on theory and analysis
of data.
7.5 7
Policy
implications and
suggested
programs are not

clearly presented
and/or logically
connected to the
theory and data
analysis.
6.5 6 5 4 ... 0
Page 1Page 2Page 3
Assignment 4
Sociology 320WR
1. Getting Ready: Familiarize yourself with Durkheim’s
ontological assumptions, epistemology,
and goals, and his theory of suicide, paying attention to the
following concepts: integration,
regulation, collective consciousness/conscience collective,
social solidarity, moral cohesion, and
ritual. Make sure you understand how these concepts come
together to create a theoretical
framework that helps us to understand acts of deviant behavior
beyond suicide. Specifically, in
this assignment you will be asked to expand Durkheim’s theory
of suicide and use it to
explain why some people engage in deviant or illegal behavior
and why others are less
likely to do so.
2. Collecting the Data: Think of two people you know, one of

whom has never been in trouble
with the law and who almost always lives up to social norms
and expectations (i.e., is considered
non-deviant). The other person should be one who has engaged
in illegal or deviant activities
(e.g., underage drinking, illegal drug use, breaking curfew, very
young sexual activity), whether
or not s/he has been in official trouble with the law.
Thinking about the concepts that Durkheim provides to help us
understand suicide (as
a form of deviant behavior), create a short interview guide that
will guide conversations with the
above two people.
Remember that integration can include membership in any type
or organization, club, or family
involvement. Here are some examples: Did the individual enjoy
school and feel a part of the
social life at school? Was s/he involved in sports, clubs, church
groups, or other extra-curricular
activities? Did s/he have a job after school?
Regulation includes the ritual involvement in these groups. At
home, did the family get together
for regular activities (e.g., evening meals, family meetings or
vacations, weekend activities,
church attendance)? If involved in extra-curricular activities,
how often did clubs meet? What
did coaches expect of him or her? E.g., An individual might
belong to a club that meets only
rarely or s/he might belong to a team that practices daily where
attendance and hard workouts are
required. Or you will likely find that both people you
interviewed belonged to families
(integration) but that one family does little more than share

living space (low regulation) while
the other expects all members to eat meals together, go boating
(or another activity) together, go
to religious services together (higher regulation).
So, rather than asking, “Were you integrated into society as a
child?” you might ask, “What clubs
or after school organizations did you belong to? Tell me about
those–what you did, how involved
or included you felt,” etc. Rather than asking about levels of
regulation in the groups that your
respondents belonged to, ask them what routines or rituals the
groups regularly went through,
how often they met, what they did when they got together, etc.
Ask also about how “close” they
felt to these groups (as a measure of solidarity and moral
cohesion) and ask what the group’s
beliefs were and how strongly the individual believed in the
legitimacy of those beliefs (as a
measure of collective consciousness). For example, Boy/Girl
Scouts profess a belief system that
might differ from the beliefs of a gang.
Don’t be afraid to wander from your interview guide, and try
not to talk in sociological jargon.
Remember that feelings of “closeness” of or “belonging” can be
substituted for “solidarity” or
“moral cohesion” and that “What beliefs or values did you learn
from the group” can be
substituted for “What was the group’s conscience collective?”
The point is to determine individual levels of integration,
regulation, solidarity or moral cohesion

with the group, and the extent to which the individual had
internalized or felt allegiance to the
collective consciousness of the groups to which s/he belonged.
Remember that Durkheim tells us
that ritual builds solidarity and moral cohesion and that those
are the forces that regulate us by
binding us to the collective consciousness of the group.
Keep notes of the answers you get and/or, with the individual’s
permission, tape record the
conversations so you can refer back to them later. Be sure NOT
to record the individual’s real
name on your notes, in your tape recordings, or in your paper.
In your paper, you should provide
a pseudonym (false name).
3. Writing the Paper:
A. Setting the Theoretical Framework: With accuracy,
completeness, precision, clarity, depth,
and breadth (see the Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking),
explain Durkheim’s ontology,
espitsmology, and goals, as well as his theory of suicide,
including the concepts integration,
regulation, collective consciousness/conscience collective,
social solidarity, moral cohesion, and
ritual delineated in “Getting Ready,” (above). (80 points)
B. Presenting the Data: Provide a “thick” description that tells
me about the lives of the two
people you have chosen to interview. A thick description
provides a level of detail that allows the
reader a sense of having been present at the interview and a
good idea of what the person’s life is
(or was) like. (20 points)

C. Analyzing the Data: With accuracy, completeness, precision,
clarity, depth, and breadth and
an appropriate amount of elaboration on your explanations, use
the theories and concepts to
explain why one of your research subjects has engaged in
deviant behavior and why the other has
not (or at least has never been caught). You need to associate
specific examples of integration,
regulation, solidarity, moral cohesion, ritual, and collective
consciousness for each subject. If
these individuals’ lives cannot be explained using the concepts
and theories, draw on other
theories (perhaps Marx or Weber have something to add here) or
create new concepts to explain
what you believe accounts for their differences in life
experiences.
The point here is to use concepts and theory to understand the
life experiences of your “sample.”
If you believe Durkheim’s theory and concepts are inadequate
for your analysis, you may draw in
theories you have learned in other classes, ideally weaving in
additional concepts with those
offered by Durkheim. If you reject the theories entirely, you
must provide a full explanation why
none of the concepts fit before you offer an alternative
theoretical analysis.
(80 points)
D. Using logic –that is, drawing conclusions based on your
data: What conclusions can you draw
from your data and your analysis about the effects that the
conceptual variables have on social

behavior? What variables, concepts, or theories might add to the
theories? (10 points)
E. Implications: If your analysis and conclusions are correct,
what are the implications for efforts
to reduce juvenile delinquency, suicide, and other forms of
deviant or criminal behavior?
Thinking more in terms of social policy, what recommendations
would you offer to the governor
or the mayor of your city to reduce rates of juvenile
delinquency? Be sure to discuss the
implications fully (10 points).
Page 1Page 2Page 3

EMILE DURKHEIM(1858-1917)EMILE DURKHEIM(.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to EMILE DURKHEIM(1858-1917)EMILE DURKHEIM(.docx

Similar to EMILE DURKHEIM(1858-1917)EMILE DURKHEIM(.docx (20)

More from christinemaritza

More from christinemaritza (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

EMILE DURKHEIM(1858-1917)EMILE DURKHEIM(.docx