Custom Essays - Sociology Essays
Does the work of the classical sociologists (e.g. Marx, Weber and Durkheim) contribute to our understanding of the meaning, experiences and consequences of living in the 'modern' world...
The discipline of Sociology is a relatively recent academic phenomenon. It is similarly a phenomenon sharing a characteristic also of the social sciences generally in that positivist scientific responses have at times been critical of its ability to explain the objects of its study, or other words whether there is any veracity to the explanations which Sociology gives for society, societal events and processes, (Giddens, 1987).
Within Sociology itself over the course of its development and almost since its inception critical debates as to the extent to which particular theories aid in contributing to our understanding, meaning, experiences and consequences of living in the modern world have informed much of the academic dialogue between sociologists, (Benton and Craib, 2001). In many ways Durkheim, Marx and Weber are the acknowledged forebears of Sociology and their theories for many have formed the conceptual framework for much sociological inquiry. However in applying what Mills (1959) called the sociological imagination to what extent can we assess the imaginations of these three authors within the context of modern societies and our self-understanding and reflexivity concerning our everyday lives? In analysing these three authors it is perhaps worth examining three key parts of their theories which contrast their work and provide radically different explanations concerning elements of society. Indeed not only do they contrast but Marx specifically reacted against some of Durkheim’s work as Weber did to Marx, hence each has a uniquely conflicting (though it must be admitted sometimes complementary in key regards) theoretical framework which can be used to assess their contribution to our sociological imaginations.
The Organisation of Society
If a central motif runs through each of these thinkers it is their writings on the method, structure and processes through which society is organised which would immediately spring to mind. For Durkheim it was the concept of solidarity, for Marx conflict and for Weber the methodological individualist processes which were critical components of understanding the ways in which societies formed and were organised, (Hughes et al, 1995). Durkheim often credited with conceptualising the field of Sociology himself drew on the observations of August Compte in attempting to delineate and identify social ‘facts’. This was done in hopes of replicating the successes of the flourishing positivist natural sciences such as physics and chemistry in their deduction and discovery of facts within these areas but to do so in relation to societies, (Fenton, 1984). In his most famous work which was on suicide Durkheim posited that the rates of suicide were dependent on a number of factors. One of these was his concept of solidarity. Solidarity in the simplest sense can be seen to refer to the degree or types of integration members of a particular society have towards each other and also a measure of the complexity of the society in the types of social bonds and social roles which exist within the society, (Durkheim, 1952). For Durkheim social problems such as suicide arose when solidarity changed from mechanical, that which characterised primitive societies to organic, or that which characterised the modern societies of Durkheim’s time. Organic societies due to their complexity in the social differentiation of roles and lack of uniformity would often result in particular members of society not integrating and to suffer from anomie which could lead to suicide. For Durkheim an important part of organic societies were those social institutions which promoted solidarity and integration such as for example the Catholic Church, (Fenton, 1984.
Marx in contrast to Durkheim saw not the degree of solidarity or integration which organised a society but in complete contrast that conflicts and crises and outcomes which produced social structures. Marx defined society in economic terms and in particular within the rubric of Capitalism, (Johnston, 1986). The source of conflicts was between the different classes, workers and capitalist, who made up a society and these were caused by the inherent exploitation built into capitalist societies through the extraction of value from labour. This unjust function for Marx was the operational basis of capitalist economies and the guiding principle in societal organisation. Marx’s theories were a powerful voice at the time he wrote them given the rapid industrialisation that was occurring particularly in the UK, the squalid living conditions of workers and the vast gulf in the distribution of wealth between workers and employers. Marx’s theories were also practical ones in that he advocated a worker’s revolution to overthrow capitalism and replace it with communism, (Marx and Engels, 1982). As Marx wrote Communist organisations were formed in many countries, the most notable of course being in Russia. Marx’s call for a revolution to overthrow the capitalist system was indeed heeded in 1917 when the Soviet Union was formed. Yet the practical application of Marxist ideas remained elusive the Soviet Union quickly fell under the rule of Stalin and became a more oppressive, exploitative and tyrannical state to the point where one negative relationship for workers between themselves and capitalism was replaced by another with the Soviet state, (Saad-Filho, 2002).
Weber has made a marked and important contribution to the field of Sociology and where the previous two thinkers attempted to give a set of hard deterministic frameworks concerning the manner in which society was organised Weber’s thinking was much more loosely and contextually based, (Diggins, 1996). In contrast for example to the collectivist approach of Marx Weber sought to explore the premise of methodological individualism. This represented for Weber a move away from the large-scale structural based explanations of society common to Marx and Durkheim as he wished to concentrate instead on the human element, the human agency involved within the processes of society. His most famous work reflecting this analytical framework was an investigation of the role of Protestantism in the development of capitalist frameworks, (Marshall, 1982). Of how values instilled in a religion could influence an economic activity and give rise to a system regulating this activity based on a personal experience with a set of values, attitudes and beliefs. This aspect of Weber, of locating the rise of European capitalist societies within Protestantism illustrates his sociology of everyday life. In other words Weber’s analysis centred and illustrated the interconnectedness of elements of human life with the progression of history and development of societies, (Morrison, 1995).
What then can be said in relation to these thinkers contribution to our understandings of current societies? Some would argue that in this period of late modernity these thinkers offer a framework for understanding particular processes that have developed giving rise to conditions of late modernity. Bourdieu for example expands on Marxist notions of capitalist value by examining the role of tastes and styles in how workers are further alienated from the system of which they are a part in the production of goods, (Fowler, 2000). The work of Foucault though critically and diametrically at odds with the grand narratives of these thinkers may be said in many ways to take Weber’s ideas further by examining how it is that individuals construct truths about the societies they live in or how they may in fact internalise truths produced by the apparatus of states at particular times, (Morrison, 1995). In the case of Durkheim perhaps his most enduring legacy is the search for causes through observing effects. While post-structuralists such as Foucault and Derrida reject unilateral causes for specifically observed effects this does not presuppose they’re being causes which are particularities, (Bertens, 1995). Similarly Durkheim’s ideas on the value of community of having a sense of belonging and the integrationist impact of certain institutions still arguably has a value today in explaining both suicide and other social problems as a result of people feeling disconnected from society, (Giddens, 1991).
Conclusion
Back to: Custom Essays...
In summation perhaps the most valuable contribution of the three thinkers discussed here has been to the discipline of Sociology of itself and implicitly from there to our understandings and refinement of theoretical frameworks explaining and rationalising the societies we live in and our experiences and everyday activities within these societies. In considering later thinkers whether this be Foucault, Giddens or Habermas it is clear that their work either draws on or expands upon key elements of these earlier thinker’s ideas or they place themselves in opposition to their conclusions. The examples of Durkheim, Marx and Weber’s work given above is in truth only a small selection of what constitutes an expansive body of work by each of the three. Their legacy was and is the stimulation of debate, the development of theoretical frameworks and is integral backdrops to the discipline of Sociology, (Benton and Craib, 2001). Our conception of what is the ‘modern’ world of how the modern world’s structures and processes have come to be is illuminated by the theoretical frameworks put forward by these thinkers. Inasmuch as they’re work is reflected in Sociology their work is also reflected in the development of societies over the period Sociology has developed as a result of their writings.
References
Benton, T. and Craib, I. (2001); Philosophy of Social Science, Palgrave, Basingstoke
Bertens, H. (1995); The Idea of the Post-modern: A History, Routledge, London
Diggins, J. P. (1996); Max Weber, Basic Books, New York
Durkheim, E. (1952); Suicide, Routledge, London
Fenton, S. (1984); Durkheim and Modern Sociology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Fowler, B. (2002) Reading Bourdieu on Society and Culture, Blackwell, Oxford
Giddens, A. (1987); Social Theory and Modern Sociology, Polty, Cambridge
Giddens, A. (1991); Modernity and Self-Identity, Stanford University Press, Stanford
Hughes, J. A., Martin, P. and Sharrock, W. (1995); Understanding Classical Sociology, Sage, London
Johnston, L. (1986); Marxism, Class Analysis and Social Pluralism, Allen and Unwin, London
Marshall, G. (1982); In Search of the Spirit of Capitalism, Hutchinson, London
Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1982); The Communist Manifesto, Penguin Books, Hammondsworth
Morrison, K. L. (1995); Marx, Durkheim, Weber, Sage, London
Mills, C.W. (1959); The Sociological Imagination, Oxford University Press, New York
Saad-Filho, A. (2002); The Value of Marx, Routledge, London
More Free Sociology Essays...
Get free sociology essays from our extensive online resource library. Hundreds of example essays available from all the major essay topics to help you with your research...
Please note: The above essay was written by a student and then submitted to us to display and help others. Thanks to all the students who have submitted work to us.
