Emile Durkheim - Wikipedia 5a435f

Émile Durkheim From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search "Durkheim" redirects here. For the spa town in , see Bad Dürkheim. For the main-belt asteroid, see 10330 Durkheim. It has been requested that certain histo rical revisions of this page be redacted under criterion RD1 (Blatant copyright violations) by an , because the article history contains significan t copyright violations of http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/174299/Emile -Durkheim/1963/Analytic-methods that have been removed in the meantime. The revisions requested to be deleted are: 296304788 to 602961636 (inclusive) Note to the nominator: Make sure the article has already been reverted to a noninfringing revision or that infringing text has been removed or replaced before submitting this request. This template is reserved for obvious cases only, for o ther cases refer to Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Note to s: In case of doubt, remove this template and post a message asking for review at WT:. Émile Durkheim French sociologist Born David Émile Durkheim April 15, 1858 Épinal, Died November 15, 1917 (aged 59) Paris, Citizenship French Nationality French Fields Philosophy, Sociology, Anthropology, Religious Studies Institutions Université de Bordeaux, La Sorbonne, Ecoles des Hautes Etudes Internationales et Politiques HEI-HEP Known for Institutionalizing sociology Influences Immanuel Kant, Ibn Khaldun, René Descartes, Plato, Herbert Spencer , Aristotle, Montesquieu, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Auguste Comte. William James, J ohn Dewey, Fustel de Coulanges Influenced Marcel Mauss, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Talcott Parsons, Maurice Halbwa chs, Lucien Lévy-Bruhl, Bronislaw Malinowski, Fernand Braudel, Pierre Bourdieu, Ch arles Taylor, Henri Bergson, Emmanuel Levinas, Steven Lukes, Alfred Radcliffe-Br own, E. E. Evans-Pritchard, Mary Douglas, Paul Fauconnet, Robert Bellah, Ziya Göka lp, David Bloor, Randall Collins, Jonathan Haidt David Émile Durkheim (French: [emil dy?k?m] or [dy?kajm];[1] April 15, 1858 Novemb er 15, 1917) was a French sociologist, social psychologist and philosopher. He f ormally established the academic discipline and, with Karl Marx and Max Weber, i s commonly cited as the principal architect of modern social science and father of sociology.[2][3] Much of Durkheim's work was concerned with how societies could maintain their in tegrity and coherence in modernity; an era in which traditional social and relig ious ties are no longer assumed, and in which new social institutions have come into being. His first major sociological work was The Division of Labour in Soci ety (1893). In 1895, he published The Rules of Sociological Method and set up th e first European department of sociology, becoming 's first professor of s ociology.[4] In 1898, he established the journal L'Année Sociologique. Durkheim's seminal monograph, Suicide (1897), a study of suicide rates in Catholic and Prot estant populations, pioneered modern social research and served to distinguish s ocial science from psychology and political philosophy. The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (1912) presented a theory of religion, comparing the social a

nd cultural lives of aboriginal and modern societies. Durkheim was also deeply preoccupied with the acceptance of sociology as a legit imate science. He refined the positivism originally set forth by Auguste Comte, promoting what could be considered as a form of epistemological realism, as well as the use of the hypothetico-deductive model in social science. For him, socio logy was the science of institutions, if this term is understood in its broader meaning as "beliefs and modes of behaviour instituted by the collectivity"[5] an d its aim being to discover structural social facts. Durkheim was a major propon ent of structural functionalism, a foundational perspective in both sociology an d anthropology. In his view, social science should be purely holistic;[6] that i s, sociology should study phenomena attributed to society at large, rather than being limited to the specific actions of individuals. He remained a dominant force in French intellectual life until his death in 1917 , presenting numerous lectures and published works on a variety of topics, inclu ding the sociology of knowledge, morality, social stratification, religion, law, education, and deviance. Durkheimian such as "collective consciousness" h ave since entered the popular lexicon.[7] Contents [hide] 1 Biography 1.1 Childhood and education 1.2 Academic career 2 Durkheim's thought 2.1 Inspirations 2.2 Establishing sociology 2.3 Methodology 2.4 Social facts 2.5 Society, collective consciousness and culture 2.6 Social pathologies and crime 2.6.1 Suicide 2.7 Religion 3 Death 4 Influences and legacy 5 Selected works 6 See also 7 References 8 Further reading 9 External links Biography[edit] Childhood and education[edit] Emile Durkheim was born in Épinal in Lorraine, coming from a long line of devout F rench Jews; his father, grandfather, and great-grandfather had been rabbis.[8] H e began his education in a rabbinical school, but at an early age, he decided no t to follow in his family's rabbinical footsteps, and switched schools.[8][9] Du rkheim himself would lead a completely secular life. Much of his work was dedica ted to demonstrating that religious phenomena stemmed from social rather than di vine factors. While Durkheim chose not to follow in the family tradition, he did not sever ties with his family or with the Jewish community.[8] Many of his mos t prominent collaborators and students were Jewish, and some were blood relation s. Marcel Mauss, a notable social anthropologist of the pre-war era, was his nep hew.[2] Moreover, the mother of another notable anthropologist, Maurice Bloch, w as his niece.[10] A precocious student, Durkheim entered the École Normale Supérieure (ENS) in 1879, a t his third attempt.[9][11] The entering class that year was one of the most bri lliant of the nineteenth century and many of his classmates, such as Jean Jaurès a

nd Henri Bergson, would go on to become major figures in 's intellectual h istory. At the ENS, Durkheim studied under the direction of Numa Denis Fustel de Coulanges, a classicist with a social scientific outlook, and wrote his Latin d issertation on Montesquieu.[12] At the same time, he read Auguste Comte and Herb ert Spencer. Thus Durkheim became interested in a scientific approach to society very early on in his career.[9] This meant the first of many conflicts with the French academic system, which had no social science curriculum at the time. Dur kheim found humanistic studies uninteresting, turning his attention from psychol ogy and philosophy to ethics and eventually, sociology.[9] He obtained his agrégat ion in philosophy in 1882, though finishing next to last in his graduating class owing to serious illness the year before.[13] There was no way that a man of Durkheim's views could receive a major academic a ppointment in Paris. From 1882 to 1887 he taught philosophy at several provincia l schools.[14] In 1885 he decided to leave for , where for two years he s tudied sociology in Marburg, Berlin and Leipzig.[14] As Durkheim indicated in se veral essays, it was in Leipzig that he learned to appreciate the value of empir icism and its language of concrete, complex things, in sharp contrast to the mor e abstract, clear and simple ideas of the Cartesian method.[15] By 1886, as part of his doctoral dissertation, he had completed the draft of his The Division of Labour in Society, and was working towards establishing the new science of soci ology.[14] Academic career[edit] A collection of Durkheim's courses on the origins of socialism (1896), edited a nd published by his nephew, Marcel Mauss, in 1928. Durkheim's period in resulted in the publication of numerous articles on German social science and philosophy; Durkheim was particularly impressed by th e work of Wilhelm Wundt.[14] Durkheim's articles gained recognition in , a nd he received a teaching appointment in the University of Bordeaux in 1887, whe re he was to teach the university's first social science course.[14] His officia l title was Chargé d'un Cours de Science Sociale et de Pédagogie and thus he taught both pedagogy and sociology (the latter had never been taught in before). [4][16] The appointment of the social scientist to the mostly humanistic faculty was an important sign of the change of times, and also the growing importance a nd recognition of the social sciences.[14] From this position Durkheim helped re form the French school system and introduced the study of social science in its curriculum. However, his controversial beliefs that religion and morality could be explained in purely of social interaction earned him many critics. Also in 1887, Durkheim married Louise Dreyfus. They would have two children, Mar ie and André.[4] The 1890s were a period of remarkable creative output for Durkheim.[14] In 1892, he published The Division of Labour in Society, his doctoral dissertation and f undamental statement of the nature of human society and its development.[17] Dur kheim's interest in social phenomena was spurred on by politics. 's defeat in the Franco-Prussian War led to the fall of the regime of Napoleon III, which was then replaced by the Third Republic. This in turn resulted in a backlash ag ainst the new secular and republican rule, as many people considered a vigorousl y nationalistic approach necessary to rejuvenate 's fading power. Durkheim , a Jew and a staunch er of the Third Republic with a sympathy towards so cialism, was thus in the political minority, a situation which galvanized him po litically. The Dreyfus affair of 1894 only strengthened his activist stance.[18] In 1895, he published The Rules of Sociological Method,[14] a manifesto stating what sociology is and how it ought to be done, and founded the first European de partment of sociology at the University of Bordeaux. In 1898, he founded L'Année S ociologique, the first French social science journal.[14] Its aim was to publish

and publicize the work of what was, by then, a growing number of students and c ollaborators (this is also the name used to refer to the group of students who d eveloped his sociological program). In 1897, he published Suicide, a case study which provided an example of what the sociological monograph might look like. Du rkheim was one of the pioneers of using quantitative methods in criminology duri ng his suicide case study. By 1902, Durkheim had finally achieved his goal of attaining a prominent positio n in Paris when he became the chair of education at the Sorbonne. Durkheim aimed for the Parisian position earlier, but the Parisian faculty took longer to acce pt what some called "sociological imperialism" and it social science to their curriculum.[18] He became a full professor (Professor of the Science of Educati on) there in 1906, and in 1913 he was named Chair in "Education and Sociology".[ 4][18] Because French universities are technically institutions for training sec ondary school teachers, this position gave Durkheim considerable influence his lec tures were the only ones that were mandatory for the entire student body. Durkhe im had much influence over the new generation of teachers; around that time he a lso served as an advisor to the Ministry of Education.[4] In 1912, he published his last major work, The Elementary Forms of The Religious Life. Émile Durkheim's grave in Montparnasse Cemetery The outbreak of World War I was to have a tragic effect on Durkheim's life. His leftism was always patriotic rather than internationalist he sought a secular, rat ional form of French life. But the coming of the war and the inevitable national ist propaganda that followed made it difficult to sustain this already nuanced p osition. While Durkheim actively worked to his country in the war, his r eluctance to give in to simplistic nationalist fervor (combined with his Jewish background) made him a natural target of the now-ascendant French Right. Even mo re seriously, the generations of students that Durkheim had trained were now bei ng drafted to serve in the army, and many of them perished in the trenches. Fina lly, Durkheim's own son, André, died on the war front in December 1915 a loss from w hich Durkheim never recovered.[18][19] Emotionally devastated, Durkheim collapse d of a stroke in Paris in 1917.[19] He was buried at the Montparnasse Cemetery i n Paris. Durkheim's thought[edit]Sociology

Outline Theory · History Positivism · Antipositivism · Functionalism · Conflict theories · Middle-range · Mathemati cal · Critical theory · Socialization · Structuralism · Interactionism Research methods Quantitative · Qualitative · Historical · Computational · Ethnographic · Network-analytic Topics · Subfields Change · Cities · Class · Crime · Culture · Development · Deviance · Demography · Education · omy · Environment · Family · Gender · Health · Industry · Internet · Knowledge · Law · Litera Medicine · Military · Mobility · Movements · Networks · Organizations · Politics · Race and e hnicity · Religion · Rural · Science · Social psychology · Stratification · Technology Browse Portal · People · Journals · Project v · t · e Throughout his career, Durkheim was concerned primarily with three goals. First, to establish sociology as a new academic discipline.[18] Second, to analyze how societies could maintain their integrity and coherence in the modern era, when things such as shared religious and ethnic background could no longer be assumed ; to that end he wrote much about the effect of laws, religion, education and si milar forces on society and social integration.[18][20] Lastly, Durkheim was con cerned with the practical implications of scientific knowledge.[18] The importan

ce of social integration is expressed throughout Durkheim's work: For if society lacks the unity that derives from the fact that the relationships between its parts are exactly regulated, that unity resulting from the harmonio us articulation of its various functions assured by effective discipline and if, in addition, society lacks the unity based upon the commitment of men's wills t o a common objective, then it is no more than a pile of sand that the least jolt or the slightest puff will suffice to scatter. Émile Durkheim[21] Inspirations[edit] Early on, during his university studies at the Ecole, Durkheim was influenced by two neo-Kantian scholars, Charles Bernard Renouvier and Émile Boutroux.[9] The pr inciples Durkheim absorbed from them included rationalism, scientific study of m orality, anti-utilitarianism and secular education.[14] His methodology was infl uenced by Numa Denis Fustel de Coulanges, a er of the scientific method.[ 14] A fundamental influence on Durkheim's thought was the sociological positivism of Auguste Comte, who effectively sought to extend and apply the scientific method found in the natural sciences to the social sciences.[14] According to Comte, a true social science should stress for empirical facts, as well as induce genera l scientific laws from the relationship among these facts. There were many point s on which Durkheim agreed with the positivist thesis. First, he accepted that t he study of society was to be founded on an examination of facts. Second, like C omte, he acknowledged that the only valid guide to objective knowledge was the s cientific method. Third, he agreed with Comte that the social sciences could bec ome scientific only when they were stripped of their metaphysical abstractions a nd philosophical speculation.[22] At the same time, Durkheim believed that Comte was still too philosophical in his outlook.[14] A second influence on Durkheim's view of society beyond Comte's positivism was t he epistemological outlook called social realism. Although he never explicitly e xposed it, Durkheim adopted a realist perspective in order to demonstrate the ex istence of social realities outside the individual and to show that these realit ies existed in the form of the objective relations of society.[23] As an epistem ology of science, realism can be defined as a perspective which takes as its cen tral point of departure the view that external social realities exist in the out er world and that these realities are independent of the individual's perception of them. This view opposes other predominant philosophical perspectives such as empiricism and positivism. Empiricists such as David Hume had argued that all r ealities in the outside world are products of human sense perception. According to empiricists, all realities are thus merely perceived: they do not exist indep endently of our perceptions, and have no causal power in themselves.[23] Comte's positivism went a step further by claiming that scientific laws could be deduce d from empirical observations. Going beyond this, Durkheim claimed that sociolog y would not only discover "apparent" laws, but would be able to discover the inh erent nature of society. Scholars also debate the exact influence of Jewish thought on Durkheim's work. T he answer remains uncertain; some scholars have argued that Durkheim's thought i s a form of secularized Jewish thought,[24][25] while others argue that proving the existence of a direct influence of Jewish thought on Durkheim's achievements is difficult or impossible.[26] Establishing sociology[edit] Durkheim authored some of the most programmatic statements on what sociology is and how it should be practiced.[9] His concern was to establish sociology as a s cience.[27] Arguing for a place for sociology among other sciences he wrote:

Sociology is, then, not an auxiliary of any other science; it is itself a distin ct and autonomous science. Émile Durkheim[28] To give sociology a place in the academic world and to ensure that it is a legit imate science, it must have an object that is clear and distinct from philosophy or psychology, and its own methodology.[18] He argued: There is in every society a certain group of phenomena which may be differentiat ed from ....those studied by the other natural sciences. Émile Durkheim[29] A fundamental aim of sociology is to discover structural "social facts".[18][30] Establishment of sociology as an independent, recognized academic discipline is amongst Durkheim's largest and most lasting legacies.[2] Within sociology, his w ork has significantly influenced structuralism or structural functionalism.[2][3 1] Scholars inspired by Durkheim include Marcel Mauss, Maurice Halbwachs, Célestin Bouglé, Alfred Radcliffe-Brown, Talcott Parsons, Robert K. Merton, Jean Piaget, C laude Lévi-Strauss, Ferdinand de Saussure, Michel Foucault, Clifford Geertz, Peter Berger, Robert Bellah, social reformer Patrick Hunout and others.[2] Methodology[edit] Cover of the French edition of The Rules of Sociological Method (1919) In The Rules of Sociological Method (1895), Durkheim expressed his will to estab lish a method that would guarantee sociology's truly scientific character. One o f the questions raised by the author concerns the objectivity of the sociologist : how may one study an object that, from the very beginning, conditions and rela tes to the observer? According to Durkheim, observation must be as impartial and impersonal as possible, even though a "perfectly objective observation" in this sense may never be attained. A social fact must always be studied according to its relation with other social facts, never according to the individual who stud ies it. Sociology should therefore privilege comparison rather than the study of singular independent facts.[32] Durkheim sought to create one of the first rigorous scientific approaches to soc ial phenomena. Along with Herbert Spencer, he was one of the first people to exp lain the existence and quality of different parts of a society by reference to w hat function they served in maintaining the quotidian (i.e. by how they make soc iety "work"). He also agreed with his organic analogy, comparing society to a li ving organism.[14] Thus his work is sometimes seen as a precursor to functionali sm.[9][33][34] Durkheim also insisted that society was more than the sum of its parts.[35] Unlike his contemporaries Ferdinand Tönnies and Max Weber, he focused not on what motivates the actions of individuals (an approach associated with methodological individualism), but rather on the study of social facts. Social facts[edit] Main article: Social fact A social fact is every way of acting, fixed or not, capable of exercising on the individual an external constraint; or again, every way of acting which is gener al throughout a given society, while at the same time existing in its own right independent of its individual manifestations. Émile Durkheim, The Rules of Sociological Method[30] Durkheim's work revolved around the study of social facts, a term he coined to d escribe phenomena that have an existence in and of themselves, are not bound to the actions of individuals, but have a coercive influence upon them.[19][36] Dur

kheim argued that social facts have, sui generis, an independent existence great er and more objective than the actions of the individuals that compose society.[ 36] Only such social facts can explain the observed social phenomena.[9] Being e xterior to the individual person, social facts may thus also exercise coercive p ower on the various people composing society, as it can sometimes be observed in the case of formal laws and regulations, but also in situations implying the pr esence of informal rules, such as religious rituals or family norms.[37] Unlike the facts studied in natural sciences, a "social" fact thus refers to a specific category of phenomena: The determining cause of a social fact must be sought among the antecedent socia l facts and not among the states of the individual consciousness. Émile Durkheim, The Rules of Sociological Method[30] Such social facts are endowed with a power of coercion, by reason of which they may control individual behaviors.[37] According to Durkheim, these phenomena can not be reduced to biological or psychological grounds.[38] Social facts can be m aterial (physical objects) or immaterial (meanings, sentiments, etc.).[36] The l atter cannot be seen or touched, but they are external and coercive, and as such , they become real, gain "facticity".[36] Physical objects can represent both ma terial and immaterial social facts; for example a flag is a physical social fact that often has various immaterial social facts (the meaning and importance of t he flag) attached to it.[36] Many social facts, however, have no material form.[36] Even the most "individual istic" or "subjective" phenomena, such as love, freedom or suicide, would be reg arded by Durkheim as objective social facts.[36] Individuals composing society d o not directly cause suicide: suicide, as a social fact, exists independently in society, and is caused by other social facts (such as rules governing behavior and group attachment), whether an individual likes it or not.[36][39] Whether a person "leaves" a society does not change anything to the fact that this society will still contain suicides. Suicide, like other immaterial social facts, exist s independently of the will of an individual, cannot be eliminated, and is as in fluential coercive as physical laws such as gravity.[36] Sociology's task thus c onsists of discovering the qualities and characteristics of such social facts, w hich can be discovered through a quantitative or experimental approach (Durkheim extensively relied on statistics).[40] Society, collective consciousness and culture[edit] Cover of the French edition of The Division of Labour in Society Regarding the society itself, like social institutions in general, Durkheim saw it as a set of social facts.[20][31] Even more than "what society is", Durkheim was interested in answering "how is a society created" and "what holds a society together". In The Division of Labour in Society, Durkheim attempted to answer t he question of what holds the society together.[41] He assumes that humans are i nherently egoistic, but norms, beliefs and values (collective consciousness) for m the moral basis of the society, resulting in social integration.[20][42] Colle ctive consciousness is of key importance to the society, its requisite function without which the society cannot survive.[43] Collective consciousness produces the society and holds it together, and at the same time individuals produce coll ective consciousness through their interactions.[42][44] Through collective cons ciousness human beings become aware of one another as social beings, not just an imals.[43] The totality of beliefs and sentiments common to the average of a societ y forms a determinate system with a life of its own. It can be termed the collec tive or common consciousness. Emile Durkheim[43]

In particular, the emotional part of the collective consciousness overrides our egoism: as we are emotionally bound to culture, we act socially because we recog nize it is the responsible, moral way to act.[45] A key to forming society is so cial interaction, and Durkheim believes that human beings, when in a group, will inevitably act in such a way that a society is formed.[45] The importance of another key social fact: the culture.[46] Groups, when interac ting, create their own culture and attach powerful emotions to it.[46] He was on e of the first scholars to consider the question of culture so intensely.[31] Du rkheim was interested in cultural diversity, and how the existence of diversity nonetheless fails to destroy a society.[47] To that, Durkheim answered that any apparent cultural diversity is overridden by a larger, common, and more generali zed cultural system, and the law.[47][48] In a socioevolutionary approach, Durkheim described the evolution of societies f rom mechanical solidarity to organic solidarity (one rising from mutual need).[3 1][41][49][50] As the societies become more complex, evolving from mechanical to organic solidarity, the division of labour is counteracting and replacing colle ctive consciousness.[41][42] In the simpler societies, people are connected to o thers due to personal ties and traditions; in the larger, modern society they ar e connected due to increased reliance on others with regard to them performing t heir specialized tasks needed for the modern, highly complex society to survive. [41] In mechanical solidarity, people are self-sufficient, there is little integ ration and thus there is the need for use of force and repression to keep societ y together.[49] Also, in such societies, people have much fewer options in life. [51] In organic solidarity, people are much more integrated and interdependent a nd specialisation and cooperation is extensive.[49] Progress from mechanical to organic solidarity is based first on population growth and increasing population density, second on increasing "morality density" (development of more complex s ocial interactions) and thirdly, on the increasing specialisation in workplace.[ 49] One of the ways mechanical and organic societies differ is the function of l aw: in mechanical society the law is focused on its punitive aspect, and aims to reinforce the cohesion of the community, often by making the punishment public and extreme; whereas in the organic society the law focuses on repairing the dam age done and is more focused on individuals than the community.[51][52] One of the main features of the modern, organic society is the importance, sacre dness even, given to the concept social fact of the individual.[53] The individu al, rather than the collective, becomes the focus of rights and responsibilities , the center of public and private rituals holding the society together a functi on once performed by the religion.[53] To stress the importance of this concept, Durkheim talked of the "cult of the individual": Thus very far from there being the antagonism between the individual and society which is often claimed, moral individualism, the cult of the individual, is in fact the product of society itself. It is society that instituted it and made of man the god whose servant it is. Émile Durkheim[54] Durkheim saw the population density and growth as key factors in the evolution o f the societies and advent of modernity.[50][55] As the number of people in a gi ven area increase, so does the number of interactions, and the society becomes m ore complex.[50] Growing competition between the more numerous people also leads to further division of labour.[50] In time, the importance of the state, the la w and the individual increases, while that of the religion and moral solidarity decreases.[55] In another example of evolution of culture, Durkheim pointed to fashion, althoug h in this case he noted a more cyclical phenomenon.[56] According to Durkheim, f ashion serves to differentiate between lower classes and upper classes, but beca

use lower classes want to look like the upper classes, they will eventually adap t the upper class fashion, depreciating it, and forcing the upper class to adopt a new fashion.[56] Social pathologies and crime[edit] As the society, Durkheim noted there are several possible pathologies that could lead to a breakdown of social integration and disintegration of the society: th e two most important ones are anomie and forced division of labour; lesser ones include the lack of coordination and suicide.[57][58] By anomie Durkheim means a state when too rapid population growth reduces the amount of interaction betwee n various groups, which in turn leads a breakdown of understanding (norms, value s, and so on).[42][57][59] By forced division of labour Durkheim means a situati on where power holders, driven by their desire for profit (greed), results in pe ople doing the work they are unsuited for.[59] Such people are unhappy, and thei r desire to change the system can destabilize the society.[59] Durkheim's views on crime were a departure from conventional notions. He believe d that crime is "bound up with the fundamental conditions of all social life" an d serves a social function.[29] He stated that crime implies, "not only that the way remains open to necessary changes but that in certain cases it directly pre pares these changes."[29] Examining the trial of Socrates, he argues that "his c rime, namely, the independence of his thought, rendered a service not only to hu manity but to his country" as "it served to prepare a new morality and faith tha t the Athenians needed".[29] As such, his crime "was a useful prelude to reforms ".[29] In this sense, he saw crime as being able to release certain social tensi ons and so have a cleansing or purging effect in society. He further stated that "the authority which the moral conscience enjoys must not be excessive; otherwi se, no-one would dare to criticize it, and it would too easily congeal into an i mmutable form. To make progress, individual originality must be able to express itself...[even] the originality of the criminal... shall also be possible".[29] Suicide[edit] Main article: Suicide (book) In Suicide (1897), Durkheim explores the differing suicide rates among Protestan ts and Catholics, arguing that stronger social control among Catholics results i n lower suicide rates. According to Durkheim, Catholic society has normal levels of integration while Protestant society has low levels. Overall, Durkheim treat ed suicide as a social fact, explaining variations in its rate on a macro level, considering society-scale phenomena such as lack of connections between people (group attachment) and lack of regulations of behavior, rather than individuals' feelings and motivations.[41][60] This study has been extensively discussed by later scholars and several major cr iticisms have emerged. First, Durkheim took most of his data from earlier resear chers, notably Adolph Wagner and Henry Morselli,[61] who were much more careful in generalizing from their own data. Second, later researchers found that the Pr otestant Catholic differences in suicide seemed to be limited to German-speaking E urope and thus may always have been the spurious reflection of other factors.[62 ] Durkheim's study of suicide has been criticized as an example of the logical e rror termed the ecological fallacy.[63][64] However, diverging views have contes ted whether Durkheim's work really contained an ecological fallacy.[65] More rec ent authors such as Berk (2006) have also questioned the micro-macro relations u nderlying Durkheim's work.[66] Some, such as Inkeles (1959),[67] Johnson (1965)[ 68] and Gibbs (1968),[69] have claimed that Durkheim's only intent was to explai n suicide sociologically within a holistic perspective, emphasizing that "he int ended his theory to explain variation among social environments in the incidence of suicide, not the suicides of particular individuals."[70] Despite its limitations, Durkheim's work on suicide has influenced proponents of control theory, and is often mentioned as a classic sociological study. The boo

k pioneered modern social research and served to distinguish social science from psychology and political philosophy.[71] Religion[edit] In The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, Durkheim s first purpose was to ide ntify the social origin and function of religion as he felt that religion was a source of camaraderie and solidarity.[41] His second purpose was to identify lin ks between certain religions in different cultures, finding a common denominator . He wanted to understand the empirical, social aspect of religion that is commo n to all religions and goes beyond the concepts of spirituality and God.[44] Durkheim defined religion as A religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred thing s, i.e., things set apart and forbidden--beliefs and practices which unite in on e single moral community called a Church, all those who adhere to them. Émile Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, Book 1, Ch. 1[72] In this definition, Durkheim avoids references to supernatural or God.[72] Durkh eim argued that the concept of supernatural is relatively new, tied to the devel opment of science and separation of supernatural that which cannot be rationally e xplained from natural, that which can.[73] Thus, according to Durkheim, for early humans, everything was supernatural.[73] Similarly, he points out that religions which give little importance to the concept of god exist, such as Buddhism, whe re the Four Noble Truths is much more important than any individual deity.[73] W ith that, Durkheim argues, we are left with the following three concepts: the sa cred (the ideas that cannot be properly explained, inspire awe and are considere d worthy of spiritual respect or devotion), the beliefs and practices (which cre ate highly emotional state collective effervescence and invest symbols with sacred i mportance), and the moral community (a group of people sharing a common moral ph ilosophy).[42][73][74][75] Out of those three concepts, Durkheim focused on the sacred, noting that it is at the very core of a religion.[73] He defined sacred things as: ...simply collective ideals that have fixed themselves on material objects... th ey are only collective forces hypostasized, that is to say, moral forces; they a re made up of the ideas and sentiments awakened in us by the spectacle of societ y, and not of sensations coming from the physical world. Émile Durkheim[76] Durkheim saw religion as the most fundamental social institution of humankind, a nd one that gave rise to other social forms.[44][56] It was the religion that ga ve humanity the strongest sense of collective consciousness.[77] Durkheim saw th e religion as a force that emerged in the early hunter and gatherer societies, a s the emotions collective effervescence run high in the growing groups, forcing them to act in a new ways, and giving them a sense of some hidden force driving them.[42] Over time, as emotions became symbolized and interactions ritualized, religion became more organized, giving a rise to the division between the sacred and the profane.[42] However, Durkheim also believed that religion was becoming less important, as it was being gradually superseded by science and the cult of an individual.[44][53] Thus there is something eternal in religion that is destined to outlive the succ ession of particular symbols in which religious thought has clothed itself. Émile Durkheim[55] However, even if the religion was losing its importance for Durkheim, it still l aid the foundation of modern society and the interactions that governed it.[77] And despite the advent of alternative forces, Durkheim argued that no replacemen t for the force of religion had yet been created,. He expressed his doubt about

modernity, seeing the modern times as "a period of transition and moral mediocri ty".[55] Durkheim also argued that our primary categories for understanding the world hav e their origins in religion.[56] It is religion, Durkheim writes, that gave rise to most if not all other social constructs, including the larger society.[77] D urkheim argued that categories are produced by the society, and thus are collect ive creations.[41] Thus as people create societies, they also create categories, but at the same time, they do so unconsciously, and the categories are prior to any individual's experience.[41] In this way Durkheim attempted to bridge the d ivide between seeing categories as constructed out of human experience and as lo gically prior to that experience.[41] Our understanding of the world is shaped b y social facts; for example the notion of time is defined by being measured thro ugh a calendar, which in turn was created to allow us to keep track of our socia l gatherings and rituals; those in turn on their most basic level originated fro m religion.[77] In the end, even the most logical and rational pursuit of scienc e can trace its origins to religion.[77] Durkheim states that, "Religion gave bi rth to all that is essential in the society.[77] In his work, Durkheim focused on totemism, the religion of the aboriginal Austra lians and Native Americans.[41][72] Durkheim saw totemism as the most ancient re ligion, and focused on it as he believed its simplicity would ease the discussio n of the essential elements of religion.[41][72] Durkheim s work on religion was heavily criticized on both empirical and theoretic al grounds by specialists in the field. The most devastating critique came from Durkheim s contemporary, Arnold van Gennep, an expert on religion and ritual, and also on Australian belief systems. Van Gennep plainly stated that Durkheim s views of primitive peoples and simple societies were entirely erroneous . Van Gennep fur ther argued that Durkheim demonstrated a lack of critical stance towards his sou rces, collected by traders and priests, naively accepting their veracity, and th at Durkheim interpreted freely from dubious data. At the conceptual level, van G ennep pointed out Durkheim s tendency to press ethnography into a prefabricated th eoretical scheme.[78] Death[edit] Durkheim died in Paris on 15 November 1917. He is buried in the Cimetière de Montp arnasse in Paris.[79] Influences and legacy[edit] His description of collective consciousness deeply influenced Ziya Gökalp's, the f ounding father of Turkish sociology, Turkish nationalism.[80] Selected works[edit] Montesquieu's contributions to the formation of social science (1892) The Division of Labour in Society (1893) The Rules of Sociological Method (1895) On the Normality of Crime (1895) Suicide (1897) The Prohibition of Incest and its Origins (1897), published in L'Année Sociologiqu e, vol. 1, pp. 1 70 Sociology and its Scientific Domain (1900), translation of an Italian text entit led "La sociologia e il suo dominio scientifico" Primitive Classification (1903), in collaboration with Marcel Mauss The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (1912) Who Wanted War? (1914), in collaboration with Ernest Denis Above All (1915) Published posthumously: Education and Sociology (1922) Sociology and Philosophy (1924)

Moral Education (1925) Socialism (1928) Pragmatism and Sociology (1955) See also[edit] Antipositivism Normlessness Social structure portal Biography portal Sociology portal References[edit] Jump up ^ Vidéo Ina Claude Lévi-Strauss : 3ème partie, Archives du XXème siècle 23/06/1974 ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Craig J. Calhoun (2002). Classical sociological theory. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 107. ISBN 978-0-631-21348-2. Retrieved 19 March 2011 . Jump up ^ Kim, Sung Ho (2007). "Max Weber". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (August 24, 2007 entry) http://plato.stanford.edu/ent ries/weber/ (Retrieved 17-02-2010) ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. P ine Forge Press. p. 104. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Durkheim, Émile. "The Rules of Sociological Method", Preface to the Second Edition, trans. W.D. Halls, The Free Press, 1982, ISBN 978 -0-02-907940-9, p.45. Jump up ^ Durkheim, Émile (1895). The Rules of Sociological Method. p. 14. "The first and most fundamental rule is: Consider social facts as things." Jump up ^ Simpson, George (Trans.) in Durkheim, Emile "The Division of Labour in Society" The Free Press, New York, 1993. p. ix ^ Jump up to: a b c Gianfranco Poggi (2000). Durkheim. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 1. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h Craig J. Calhoun (2002). Classical sociological theory. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 103. ISBN 978-0-631-21348-2. Retrieved 19 March 2011. Jump up ^ Mughal, Muhammad Aurang Zeb. 2013. Bloch, Maurice. Reece Jon McGee and Richard L. Warms (eds), Theory in Social and Cultur al Anthropology: An Encyclopedia, Vol. 1. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 77-88. Jump up ^ Gianfranco Poggi (2000). Durkheim. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 2. Jump up ^ Bottomore, Tom, Robert Nisbet (1978). A History of Sociological Analysis. Basic Books. p. 8. Jump up ^ Steven Lukes (1985). Emile Durkheim, his life and work: a historical and critical study. Stanford University Press. p. 64. ISBN 978-0-80 47-1283-5. Retrieved 26 February 2014. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Craig J. Calhoun (2002). Classical sociological theory. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 104. ISBN 978-0-631-21348-2. Retrieved 19 March 2011. Jump up ^ Jones, Robert Alun and Rand J. Spiro. "Contextualization, cognitive flexibility, and hypertext: the convergence of int erpretive theory, cognitive psychology, and advanced information technologies." in Susan Leigh Star (ed.) 1995. The Cultures of Computing. Sociological Review M onograph Series, Google Print p. 149 Jump up ^ Gianfranco Poggi (2000). Durkheim. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 3. Jump up ^ Gianfranco Poggi (2000). Durkheim. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. x. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i Craig J. Calhoun (2002). Classical sociological theory. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 105. ISBN 978-0-631-21348-2. Retrieved 19 March 2011. ^ Jump up to: a b c Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005).

Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 105. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b c Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 102. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 136. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Morrison, Ken (2006): Marx, Durkheim, Weber: formations of modern social thought. Second edition. SAGE, p. 151. ^ Jump up to: a b Morrison, Ken (2006), p. 152. Jump up ^ Strenski, Ivan. 1997. Durkheim and the Jews of . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, Google Print pp. 1-2 Jump up ^ "While Durkheim did not become a Rabbi, he may have transformed his father's philosophical and moral concerns into something new, hi s version of sociology." Me trovic, Stjepan Gabriel (1993). Émile Durkheim and the r eformation of sociology. Rowman & Littlefield, Google Print, p. 37 Jump up ^ Pickering, W. S. F. 2001. "The Enigma of Durkheim's Jewishness", in Critical Assessments of Leading Sociologists. British Centre for Durkheimian Studies, v. 1, Google Print, p. 79 Jump up ^ Damian Popolo (16 January 2011). A New Science of International Relations: Modernity, Complexity and the Kosovo Conflict. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. pp. 97 . ISBN 978-1-4094-1226-7. Retrieved 17 March 2011. Jump up ^ Mary C. Brinton; Victor Nee (2001). The New Institutionalism in Sociology. Stanford University Press. pp. 11 . ISBN 978-0-8047 -4276-4. Retrieved 17 March 2011. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Emile Durkheim, Foundations of the Classic Sociological Theory, in Scott Appelrouth; Laura Desfor Edles (26 September 2007) . Classical and contemporary sociological theory: text and readings. Pine Forge Press. pp. 101 102. ISBN 978-0-7619-2793-8. Retrieved 28 March 2011. ^ Jump up to: a b c Durkheim, Émile [1895] "The Rules of Sociological Method" 8th edition, trans. Sarah A. Solovay and John M. Mueller, ed. George E. G. Catlin (1938, 1964 edition), pp. 13. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. P ine Forge Press. p. 103. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ "Durkheim was the first to seriously use the comparative method correctly in the scientific sense" Cf. Collins, Randall. 1975. Conflict S ociology: Toward an Explanatory Science. N.Y.: Academic Press, p. 529 Jump up ^ Hayward, J.E.S. "Solidarist Syndicalism: Durkheim and DuGuit", Sociological Review, Vol. 8 (1960) Jump up ^ Thompson, Kenneth. 2002. Emile Durkheim. Routledge. Jump up ^ "Science cannot describe individuals, but only types. If human societies cannot be classified, they must remain inaccessible to scientifi c description." Cf. Durkheim, Émile [1892] "Montesquieu's Contribution to the Rise of Social Science" in Montesquieu and Rousseau. Forerunners of Sociology, trans . Ralph Manheim (1960), p.9 ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine Forge Press. p. 106. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b Martin, Michael and Lee C. McIntyre. 1994. Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science. Boston: MIT press, Google Print p. 433 Jump up ^ Martin, Michael and Lee C. McIntyre. 1994. Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science. Boston: MIT press, Google Print p. 434 Jump up ^ Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 107. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ "Suicide [...] is indeed the paradigm case of Durkheim's positivism: it remains the exemplar of the sociological application of statistic s." Hassard, John. 1995. Sociology and Organization Theory: Positivism, Paradigm

s and Postmodernity. Cambridge University Press (ISBN 0-521-48458-8) Google Prin t p. 15 ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Craig J. Calhoun (2002). Classical sociological theory. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 107. ISBN 978-0-631-21348-2. Retrieved 19 March 2011 . Jump up ^ Kim, Sung Ho (2007). "Max Weber". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (August 24, 2007 entry) http://plato.stanford.edu/ent ries/weber/ (Retrieved 17-02-2010) ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. P ine Forge Press. p. 104. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Durkheim, Émile. "The Rules of Sociological Method", Preface to the Second Edition, trans. W.D. Halls, The Free Press, 1982, ISBN 978 -0-02-907940-9, p.45. Jump up ^ Durkheim, Émile (1895). The Rules of Sociological Method. p. 14. "The first and most fundamental rule is: Consider social facts as things." Jump up ^ Simpson, George (Trans.) in Durkheim, Emile "The Division of Labour in Society" The Free Press, New York, 1993. p. ix ^ Jump up to: a b c Gianfranco Poggi (2000). Durkheim. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 1. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h Craig J. Calhoun (2002). Classical sociological theory. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 103. ISBN 978-0-631-21348-2. Retrieved 19 March 2011. Jump up ^ Mughal, Muhammad Aurang Zeb. 2013. Bloch, Maurice. Reece Jon McGee and Richard L. Warms (eds), Theory in Social and Cultur al Anthropology: An Encyclopedia, Vol. 1. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 77-88. Jump up ^ Gianfranco Poggi (2000). Durkheim. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 2. Jump up ^ Bottomore, Tom, Robert Nisbet (1978). A History of Sociological Analysis. Basic Books. p. 8. Jump up ^ Steven Lukes (1985). Emile Durkheim, his life and work: a historical and critical study. Stanford University Press. p. 64. ISBN 978-0-80 47-1283-5. Retrieved 26 February 2014. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Craig J. Calhoun (2002). Classical sociological theory. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 104. ISBN 978-0-631-21348-2. Retrieved 19 March 2011. Jump up ^ Jones, Robert Alun and Rand J. Spiro. "Contextualization, cognitive flexibility, and hypertext: the convergence of int erpretive theory, cognitive psychology, and advanced information technologies." in Susan Leigh Star (ed.) 1995. The Cultures of Computing. Sociological Review M onograph Series, Google Print p. 149 Jump up ^ Gianfranco Poggi (2000). Durkheim. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 3. Jump up ^ Gianfranco Poggi (2000). Durkheim. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. x. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i Craig J. Calhoun (2002). Classical sociological theory. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 105. ISBN 978-0-631-21348-2. Retrieved 19 March 2011. ^ Jump up to: a b c Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 105. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b c Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 102. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 136. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Morrison, Ken (2006): Marx, Durkheim, Weber: formations of modern social thought. Second edition. SAGE, p. 151.

^ Jump up to: a b Morrison, Ken (2006), p. 152. Jump up ^ Strenski, Ivan. 1997. Durkheim and the Jews of . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, Google Print pp. 1-2 Jump up ^ "While Durkheim did not become a Rabbi, he may have transformed his father's philosophical and moral concerns into something new, hi s version of sociology." Me trovic, Stjepan Gabriel (1993). Émile Durkheim and the r eformation of sociology. Rowman & Littlefield, Google Print, p. 37 Jump up ^ Pickering, W. S. F. 2001. "The Enigma of Durkheim's Jewishness", in Critical Assessments of Leading Sociologists. British Centre for Durkheimian Studies, v. 1, Google Print, p. 79 Jump up ^ Damian Popolo (16 January 2011). A New Science of International Relations: Modernity, Complexity and the Kosovo Conflict. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. pp. 97 . ISBN 978-1-4094-1226-7. Retrieved 17 March 2011. Jump up ^ Mary C. Brinton; Victor Nee (2001). The New Institutionalism in Sociology. Stanford University Press. pp. 11 . ISBN 978-0-8047 -4276-4. Retrieved 17 March 2011. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Emile Durkheim, Foundations of the Classic Sociological Theory, in Scott Appelrouth; Laura Desfor Edles (26 September 2007) . Classical and contemporary sociological theory: text and readings. Pine Forge Press. pp. 101 102. ISBN 978-0-7619-2793-8. Retrieved 28 March 2011. ^ Jump up to: a b c Durkheim, Émile [1895] "The Rules of Sociological Method" 8th edition, trans. Sarah A. Solovay and John M. Mueller, ed. George E. G. Catlin (1938, 1964 edition), pp. 13. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. P ine Forge Press. p. 103. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ "Durkheim was the first to seriously use the comparative method correctly in the scientific sense" Cf. Collins, Randall. 1975. Conflict S ociology: Toward an Explanatory Science. N.Y.: Academic Press, p. 529 Jump up ^ Hayward, J.E.S. "Solidarist Syndicalism: Durkheim and DuGuit", Sociological Review, Vol. 8 (1960) Jump up ^ Thompson, Kenneth. 2002. Emile Durkheim. Routledge. Jump up ^ "Science cannot describe individuals, but only types. If human societies cannot be classified, they must remain inaccessible to scientifi c description." Cf. Durkheim, Émile [1892] "Montesquieu's Contribution to the Rise of Social Science" in Montesquieu and Rousseau. Forerunners of Sociology, trans . Ralph Manheim (1960), p.9 ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine Forge Press. p. 106. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b Martin, Michael and Lee C. McIntyre. 1994. Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science. Boston: MIT press, Google Print p. 433 Jump up ^ Martin, Michael and Lee C. McIntyre. 1994. Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science. Boston: MIT press, Google Print p. 434 Jump up ^ Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 107. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ "Suicide [...] is indeed the paradigm case of Durkheim's positivism: it remains the exemplar of the sociological application of statistic s." Hassard, John. 1995. Sociology and Organization Theory: Positivism, Paradigm s and Postmodernity. Cambridge University Press (ISBN 0-521-48458-8) Google Prin t p. 15 ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k Craig J. Calhoun (2002). Classical sociological theory. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 106. ISBN 978-0-631-21348-2. Retrieved 19 March 2011. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. P ine Forge Press. p. 137. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b c Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For

ge Press. p. 108. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. P ine Forge Press. p. 112. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 109. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 110. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 111. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 127. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Sztompka, Piotr, Socjologia, Znak, 2002, ISBN 83-240-0218-9, p.500 ^ Jump up to: a b c d Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. P ine Forge Press. p. 125. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 123. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 124. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b c Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. pp. 132 133. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Émile Durkheim (15 July 2009). Sociology and philosophy. Taylor & Francis. pp. 29 . ISBN 978-0-415-55770-2. Retrieved 8 April 2 011. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. P ine Forge Press. p. 134. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. P ine Forge Press. p. 113. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 128. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 130. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b c Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 129. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 131. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Stark, Rodney and William Sims Bainbridge. 1996. Religion, Deviance and Social Control. Routledge, Google Print p. 32 Jump up ^ Pope, Whitney, and Nick Danigelis. 1981. "Sociology's One Law," Social Forces 60:496-514. Jump up ^ Freedman, David A. 2002. The Ecological Fallacy. University of California. [1] Jump up ^ H. C. Selvin. 1965. "Durkheim's Suicide:Further Thoughts on a Methodological Classic", in R. A. Nisbet (ed.) Émile Durkheim pp. 113-136 Jump up ^ Van Poppel, Frans, and Lincoln H. Day. "A Test of

Durkheim's Theory of Suicide--Without Committing the Ecological Fallacy". Americ an Sociological Review, Vol. 61, No. 3 (Jun., 1996), p. 500 Jump up ^ Berk, Bernard B. "Macro-Micro Relationships in Durkheim's Analysis of Egoistic Suicide". Sociological Theory, Vol. 24, No. 1 (M ar., 2006), pp. 78-79 Jump up ^ Cf. Inkeles, A. 1959. "Personality and Social Structure." pp. 249-76 in Sociological Today, edited by R. K. Merton, L. Broom, and L. S. Co ttrell. New York: Basic Books. Jump up ^ Cf. Johnson, B. D. 1965. "Durkheim's One Cause of Suicide." American Sociological Review, 30:875-86 Jump up ^ Cf. Gibbs, J. P. and W. T. Martin. 1958. "A Theory of Status Integration and Its Relationship to Suicide." American Sociological, Revi ew 23:14-147. Jump up ^ Berk, Bernard B. "Macro-Micro Relationships in Durkheim's Analysis of Egoistic Suicide". Sociological Theory, Vol. 24, No. 1 (M ar., 2006), p. 60 Jump up ^ Gianfranco Poggi (2000). Durkheim. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Chapter 1. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. P ine Forge Press. p. 115. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. P ine Forge Press. p. 116. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 118. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. Pine For ge Press. p. 120. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Steven Lukes (1985). Emile Durkheim, his life and work: a historical and critical study. Stanford University Press. p. 25. ISBN 978-0-80 47-1283-5. Retrieved 13 April 2011. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Kenneth Allan; Kenneth D. Allan (2 November 2005). Explorations in Classical Sociological Theory: Seeing the Social World. P ine Forge Press. p. 114. ISBN 978-1-4129-0572-5. Jump up ^ Thomassen, Bjørn (1 August 2012). "Émile Durkheim between Gabriel Tarde and Arnold van Gennep: founding moments of sociology and a nthropology". Social Anthropology 20 (3): 231 249. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8676.2012.00 204.x. Jump up ^ Émile Durkheim at the Notable Names Database Jump up ^ [2], Turkay Salim Nefes, 'Ziya Gökalp s adaptation of Emile Durkheim s sociology in his formulation of the modern Turkish nation' Intern ational Sociology May 2013 vol. 28 no. 3 335-350. Further reading[edit] Bellah, Robert N. (ed.) (1973). Emile Durkheim: On Morality and Society, Selecte d Writings. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press (ISBN 978-0-226-17336-8). Cotterrell, Roger (1999). Emile Durkheim: Law in a Moral Domain. Edinburgh Unive rsity Press / Stanford University Press (ISBN 0-8047-3808-4, ISBN 978-0-8047-380 8-8). Cotterrell, Roger (ed.) (2010). Emile Durkheim: Justice, Morality and Politics. Ashgate (ISBN 978-0-7546-2711-1). Douglas, Jack D. (1973). The Social Meanings of Suicide. Princeton University Pr ess (ISBN 978-0-691-02812-5). Eitzen, Stanley D. and Maxine Baca Zinn (1997). Social Problems (11th ed.). Need ham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon (ISBN 0-205-54796-6). Giddens, Anthony (ed.) (1972). Emile Durkheim: Selected Writings. London: Cambri dge University Press (ISBN 0-521-09712-6, ISBN 978-0-521-09712-3). Giddens, Anthony (ed.) (1986). Durkheim on Politics and the State. Cambridge: Po lity Press (ISBN 0-7456-0131-6).

Henslin, James M. (1996). Essentials of Sociology: A Down-to-Earth Approach. Nee dham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon (ISBN 0-205-17480-9, ISBN 978-0-205-17480-5). Jones, Susan Stedman (2001). Durkheim Reconsidered. Polity (ISBN 0-7456-1616-X, ISBN 978-0-7456-1616-2). Lemert, Charles (2006). Durkheim's Ghosts: Cultural Logics and Social Things. Ca mbridge University Press (ISBN 0-521-84266-2, ISBN 978-0-521-84266-2). Leroux, Robert, Histoire et sociologie en . De l'histoire-science à la socio logie durkheimienne, Paris, Presses Universitaires de , 1998. Lockwood, David (1992). Solidarity and Schism: "The Problem of Disorder" in Durk heimian and Marxist Sociology. Oxford: Clarendon Press (ISBN 0-19-827717-2, ISBN 978-0-19-827717-0). Macionis, John J. (1991). Sociology (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Pre ntice Hall. ISBN 0-13-820358-X. Lukes, Steven (1985). Emile Durkheim: His Life and Work, a Historical and Critic al Study. Stanford University Press (ISBN 0-8047-1283-2, ISBN 978-0-8047-1283-5) . Mestrovic, Stjepan (1988). Emile Durkheim and the Reformation of Sociology. Rowm an & Littlefield. (ISBN 0-8476-7867-9) Osipova, Elena (1989). "Emile Durkheim s Sociology" (DOC, DjVu). In Igor Kon (ed.) . A History of Classical Sociology. Translated by H. Campbell Creighton, M.A. (O xon). Moscow: Progress Publishers. pp. 206 254. Pickering, W. S. F. (2000). Durkheim and Representations, Routledge (ISBN 0-41519090-8). Pickering, W. S. F. (ed.) (1979). Durkheim: Essays on Morals and Education, Rout ledge & Kegan Paul (ISBN 0-7100-0321-8). Pickering, W. S. F. (ed.) (1975). Durkheim on Religion, Routledge & Kegan Paul ( ISBN 0-7100-8108-1). Siegel, Larry J (2007). Criminology: Theories, Patterns, and Typologies (7th ed. ) Wadsworth/Thomson Learning (ISBN 0-495-00572-X, ISBN 978-0-495-00572-8). Tekiner, Deniz (2002). "German Idealist Foundations of Durkheim's Sociology and Teleology of Knowledge", Theory and Science, III, 1, Online publication. Thompson, Kenneth (2002). Emile Durkheim (2nd ed.) Routledge (ISBN 0-415-28530-5 , ISBN 978-0-415-28530-8). External links[edit]Find more about Émile Durkheim at Wikipedia's sister projects Media from Commons Quotations from Wikiquote Source texts from Wikisource Learning resources from Wikiversity Émile Durkheim at DMOZ L'Ecoles des Hautes Etudes Internationales et Poltiques HEI-HEP The Durkheim pages (University of Chicago) DD Digital Durkheim Bibliography on Durkheim (McMaster University) Annotated bibliography on Durkheim and Religion (University of North Carolina) Review material for studying Émile Durkheim Institut Marcel Mauss à l'EHESS Émile Durkheim entry in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. [hide] v · t · e Émile Durkheim Books Division of Labour in Society (1893) · Rules of Sociological Method (1895) · Suicide (1897) · Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (1912) [show] v · t · e Positivism

[show] v · t · e Jurisprudence Authority control WorldCat · VIAF: 56609141 · LCCN: n78092050 · ISNI: 0000 0001 2133 9861 · GND: 118528297 · SUDOC: 026846527 · BNF: cb11901387t (data) · NDL: 00438459 · NKC: jn19990001927

Categories: 1858 births 1917 deaths Anthropologists of religion Burials at Montparnasse Cemetery École Normale Supérieure alumni Émile Durkheim French agnostics French anthropologists French Jews French philosophers French sociologists Jewish agnostics Jewish scientists Jewish sociologists Lycée Louis-le-Grand alumni People from Épinal Philosophers of social science Social democrats Sociologists of religion University of Leipzig alumni 19th-century French writers 20th-century French writers 19th-century philosophers 20th-century philosophers Men sociologists Navigation menu Create Article Talk Read Edit View history Main page Contents Featured content Current events Random article Donate to Wikipedia Wikimedia Shop Interaction Help About Wikipedia Community portal Recent changes page Tools What links here Related changes

file Special pages Permanent link Page information Data item Cite this page Print/export Create a book as PDF Printable version Languages ??????? Aragonés Az?rbaycanca ????? Bân-lâm-gú ?????????? ????????? Bosanski Brezhoneg Català Ce tina Cymraeg Dansk Deutsch Eesti ???????? Español Esperanto Euskara ????? Français Frysk Furlan Galego ??? ?????? Hrvatski Ido Bahasa Indonesia Interlingua Íslenska Italiano ????? Basa Jawa ??????? ??????? Kiswahili ???????? Latina Latvie u Lëtzebuergesch Lietuviu Magyar ?????????? Nederlands ??? Norsk bokmål Norsk nynorsk Occitan

?????? Piemontèis Polski Português Româna ??????? ????????? Shqip Simple English Slovencina Sloven cina ????? ?????? / srpski Suomi Svenska ????? ??? Türkçe ?????????? Ti?ng Vi?t Volapük Winaray Yorùbá emaite ka ?? Edit links This page was last modified on 19 May 2014 at 10:03. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; add itional may apply. By using this site, you agree to the of Use and P rivacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a ed trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, I nc., a non-profit organization. About Wikipedia Disclaimers Wikipedia Developers Mobile view