Ideas and Influences of Emile and Marx - Essay Example

Introduction Marx and Durkheim had main emphasis on society structure. Their work played an important role in coming up with relevant information that could be used in managing the society. In a society people want to live in peace and this will mean that if they are not given what they require then there will be conflict in that particular society as people will be involved in practices that will not be in line with norms and rules of society. Karl Marx had his philosophy on dialectical materialism in that he claimed that in a society there were two groups that is the thesis and antithesis in this he meant that in a society there were those who have control of property or goods that is bourgeoisie and those who work that is proletariat. He said that in these two groups there is conflict of interest as they have to define how a society has to be constructed. (Karl, 1989, pp, 78) This will mean that in such society there will be no owners of property and workers as this will be have dealt with. But the problem with revolution stage is that all individuals are supposed to be workers so that there are rulers and workers but it could not work because he later learnt that not all workers could be valued equally in society, this is because those who owned knowledge were seen to be in power in advanced societies. Therefore, indication of having equality could not work. But he said that with violent conflict then these two groups would completely do away with classes in society. He had a theory on capitalism, the means of production would result in violent of revolutions and the results in this would be an ideal society that is a communistic society. He came up with measures that could be used for reformation and they include: abolition of real estate rights, the progressive income taxation, abolition of inheritance rights, state ownership of the media, nationalization of bank, confiscation of all properties belonging to enemies of communism, state production planning, equal obligation of all individuals to work, abolition of the distinction between town and free education. He said that with these changes then it will be possible to have a classless society. He believed also that human morality was determined by social structure of the state because the social structure was based on control of material goods and economics and therefore he claimed that morality is determined by means of production and distribution. (Hughes, shamrock and martin, 2003, pp, 35).He said that industry is the highest form of human endeavour in that it is concerned with production of goods that support real material needs and the communist state is superior as it controls the production of all citizens and his claim was that because the state is in control of production then also it should be in charge of morality. in labour, Marx was not in a position to give clear information on labour and what he meant by communist society this means that from all the theories of Marx one can be able to question but still his theories hold because there is no way people can be in a society and have the same value because in a society there will be doctors, farmers and peasants and other groups that are still in society with different positions this will mean that a doctor will not be compared to a peasant even if they are in the same society. Generally what people know about Marx is that in society there are many divisions that exist because people are not the same in whatever they do. But his claim on classless society can work if people have been valued the same in that they have to do their work so that the divisions can be dealt with but what they have to do is to have all people been in the same rank so that they can be able to live and do whatever they think will lead to reduced divisions. (Hughes, shamrock and martin, 2003, pp, 56).Therefore to have classless society will not be possible but from his claim with high conflict between the groups that take place in society then they will be in a position to have people been in the same class but the problem still remains because it is not possible to have all people in a society been ranked in the same class due to the fact that there is education and other factors that have to come up which will lead to labour division in society. Marx developed the materialism theory which he came up with discussion of history as science; he made a prediction of success of working class which was usual. He was against the works of Hegel and his work influenced the modern socialism. That is why is know as the father of economic history and sociology. Marx used materials of economic to have a moral- philosophical-sociological structure. He was mainly concerned with the social economic problems he made a discussion on the relationship between institutions and values. In his theory of materialistic he had two ideas in his mind; in the economic system there is determination of prevailing ideas and on history he said that it is an ongoing process that is regulated. The second idea was that by economic institutions there is evolvement in several stages. According to Hegel ideas in the first idea of Marx then a contradiction came up, this is because according to Hegel history was determined by universal idea that shapes the institutions in the world but according to Marx institutions shape ideas. In the second idea of Marx on historical evolution there is a connection with concept of dialectics. He said that in each stage of development the two groups are likely to come up. According to Marx thesis group is for precapitalist period and the antithesis is for the period of capitalism and labour use, the synthesis is the final product where capital will be for every one but not a specific group of people. Capitalism is the last stage of historical development before classless society which will only be possible when proletariat will be victorious over capitalist. It is during this time when the transitional order will be created and the final stage of development will be achieved. (Karl, 1989, pp, 90) Durkheim had emphasis on division of labour and specialization as social trends and his influence on human relations school of thought which was concerned with the imbalance between individual social needs and requirements of large scale complex work organization. He had the claim that the state of industry would result from a division of labour that leads to anomie. Durkheim talked about social solidarity, collective conscience and the social nature of human. Symbolic interactionists see social systems as products of social interactions and the meaning that people give to such situations. (Emile, 1990, pp, 45) In symbolic interactions there were several premises that include that human beings act towards things that are on basis that they have on these things. In that a human being will have to give meaning on what he or she knows about that thing. He had dialectical approach in that he aimed at dualistic perceptions of man and society where by he say man to be in centre. According to Durkheim, utilitarianism cannot be used as a measure of moral order. In his theory of suicide he said that it varies with degree of integration of religious society and domestic society. He also said that suicide varies with degree of integration of social groups. He saw anomie as an economic consequence in that suicide brings about financial problems and with increase in suicide then prosperity rises. He had emphasis on socialization as the expense of politicization and this explained the frequent critiques of his information on the interest in order, community and solidarity which were derived from his powerful belief in moral education. In talking of functionalist he said that in a society there are many groups and these groups have to work aiming at ensuring the survival of society as a whole. Therefore from this theory it can be clear that these groups that are in society have to all have the same goals so that they do not conflict because each group has got a task that it is supposed to play in order to ensure that all what is required in society is reached. Therefore, for a society to function well then people are supposed to accept internally either consciously or unconsciously so that they can contribute to the organic functioning of society. When people accept a role in society then they develop a form of social conscience which is termed as conscience collective by Emile. He saw that the future case of society would be to assign people their roles rather than having capital inheritance but most of the modern sociologists are not for this idea. There is the view that different people in society have different roles but the opportunities of these people are affected by class situation. Been that he is not a defender of capitalism but from the functionalist theory then he can be seen to be a defender of capitalism, this is because according to capitalist the educational system is fair because it is preparing these people for their roles in society which will be according to their abilities. It is maintained in the functionalist theory that individuals have high degree of equality of opportunities within the education system, and a link is seen between education and economy. This has the implication that with education system then the economy of the society will change in the direct in the direction that will be required by these people. (Emile, 1990, pp, 78) Therefore, with many people who are educated then each will have a role to play in society and this will lead to high production as there will be division of labour in the society. But still this theory does not show the conflict that exist in education system and this will mean that with these conflicts then they will not be in a position to play their roles that are set for them in society. Emile came up with types of suicide and gave reason why many people decide to have suicide. From all the works of Emile then people are in a position to know how society is structured and problems that are likely to face people as they live in the society. Conclusion These two sociologists had a theory on division of labour according to Marx there are two groups in society but with Emile the talked of the roles that are for each group in society. This has the indication that these two sociologists had the same idea but they were not taking the negative part of their theories. We cannot do away with these theories since as they are part of what people believe. In that there is modification of these theories so that they can fit in the modern world with omission of some things. Reference: Emile, D, (1990): Theories in relation to modern world. Emile publications Hughes, J, sharrock, W and martin, P, (2003): Understanding classical sociology; 2nd edition. SAGE publications Karl, M, (1989): Management of society in relation to his theories. Selected works; London Read More