1. Describe the process that leads to the preponderance of organic solidarity in modern societies:
a) what does Durkheim argue are the causes of the development of the division of labor?
b) how does the development of the division of labor lead to the emergence of organic solidarity?
2. Describe the process by which individuality (or individual personality) develops along with the division of labor.
3. According to Durkheim, what is the relationship between collective consciousness and
a) mechanical solidarity
b) organic solidarity
4. What does Durkheim propose as an explanation for what makes a certain action into a crime?
5. What are the two main abnormal forms of the division of labor? What are their distinguishing characteristics? Give examples of social phenomena that could be considered symptoms of each of these pathological developments?
6. Much of Durkheim's Division of Labor in Society concerns the moral life of a social grouping. He discusses two different types of society which are distinguished by the different kinds of social bonds that hold them together (mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity). Part of this discussion of social solidarity involves the shared values and social norms governing what is widely considered right and wrong or just and unjust (collective consciousness).
a) Briefly describe how Durkheim theory of moral and legal change. What are the moral and legal characteristics of the two kinds of society? How does the division of labor which grows more complex with the population affect the moral life of a society? How does it lead from one form of solidarity to another?
b) Use Durkheim's theory to interpret the article the chapter by Mark Weiner, "Individualism's Paradox" from The Rule of the Clan. What features of the social life of liberal societies versus those of clan societies mentioned in the chapter would Durkheim point to as relevant for illustrating his ideas in the Division of Labor in Society? How would he characterize the societies Weiner talks about? How well does Weiner's book fit with Durkheim's theories? Why?
7. Durkheim's Suicide attempts to explain the causal links between social solidarity and rates of suicide in a society or social group.
a) Briefly summarize Durkheim's sociological theory of suicide. What distinguishes the four social types of suicide? What is the feature common to them all makes these suicides a social phenomenon and not one simply psychological in origin? What kinds of groups or societies might you expect to find each of these kinds of suicidal tendencies?
b) Use Durkheim's theory to interpret the articles by Scott Atran on the social psychology of suicide bombers. This form of suicide all too familiar in today's world seems to fit well with Durkheim's sociological theory of suicide. Suicide bombers, who sacrifice themselves for a higher cause, usually of a religious character, might seem to accord with one or more of three social types of suicide outlined by Durkheim (probably not the fatalistic kind). From Atran's reports about what is known about suicidal attackers, which of the three kinds of suicide would you argue is displayed in their acts? Is there one that best characterizes them? Two? All three? Why? [Note: In one sense, there's no wrong answer. An argument could be made for any, some or all these social types of suicide being on display. I am interested in how you would make the argument.]
8.. How would you compare Durkheim's discussion of the advancement of the division of labor in the "Conclusion" to the Division of Labor in Society as it relates to the development of human nature, individuality and freedom with the similar discussion of species being by Marx in the
"Alienated Labor" section of the Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844?