Marx Idea of Class and Durkheims Division of Labour - Coursework Example

TOPIC COMPARE AND CONTRAST MARX IDEA AND DURKHEIM DIVISION OF LABOR Once there was a time different societies in the world were nothing more than a ruling class and a class that was ruled with set classes. There was no probability for a member of the ruling class to cross over to the working class or vice versa. There was sameness in their labor and their just kept them alive. In those times, there was limited possibility of improving oneself. Then came a drastic change, in which the model of Capitalism and industrialization was initiated to societies all over the world. Some societies acknowledged it while others denied it. Those who accepted it became modern societies or Capitalist societies. Many theorists in the sociology have tried to explain or simplify the complexities of these societies, among the greatest of them Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim. Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim are considered as the fathers of sociology. Both of them had a deep power on the development of sociological theories. Karl Marx (1818-1883) wrote the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts in 1844, and one of these documents, titled Estranged Labor, includes his debate of alienation - the experience of isolation resulting from powerlessness. Marx’s main concern was with the formations of capitalism that result this alienation. He gave a theory of alienation deep-rooted in social composition. In his theory he wanted to get across two vital and foremost ideas. Firstly, that mankind make society, and at some point society is a natural extension of their nature and their being, and secondly, as modern society develops, human beings begin to feels that society is not of their making, and no longer reflects their being or their nature, but instead appears to be alien. Marx argued that laboring was the primary way by which human kind exposed themselves in nature and history. According to Marx, alienation breaks fundamental association individuals have to the self-defining aspect of laboring activity. He identified four characteristics of alienation: (i) Alienation from the product of labor; (ii) Alienation from productive activity; (iii) Alienation from the human species; and, (iv) Alienation from fellow human beings. Product alienation takes place when workers become alienated from the objects they produce. The product of their labor belongs to the capitalists not to the workers. The capitalists may utilize it however they wish mostly to sell the product to get profit. Furthermore, workers often do not have information of the features of production they are not involved in, and have no sense of their job in the entire production process. Alienation from productive activity refers that workers do not work their own satisfaction to fulfil their needs but capitalism makes the work into nothing more than a way of getting their material needs fulfilled. Workers get low salaries in turn of giving their owners the right to use them according to their needs. A capitalist decides what to do with the productive activity as it belongs to them. This often makes the productive activity dull and monotonous only to maximize the profit. Alienation from the human species is the third type of alienation which states that. Workers work like animals and machines rather than humans. Species alienation numbs their consciousness which eventually annihilates the link human have with their consciousness and other humans. Life becomes an authority mere physical existence. Alienation from fellow humans is the last type of alienation which emphasis the alienation from the human social society. Marx’s assumed that individuals basically need to work together for their survival. The concept of togetherness is completely destroyed by the concept of capitalism. Individuals are forced to work collectively for the capitalist, mostly competing with each other to produce more, or to work more efficiently. Resentment develops among the workers towards their colleagues. Since universal competition becomes the custom, seclusion and interpersonal resentment makes workers in capitalist societies estranged from co-workers. Communism, according to Marx was the solution to this problem as this would enable the accomplishment of "his potentialities as a human. The concept of division of labor was used by Durkheim in 1893 but he began to use the term in a more filtered sense in 1897 to explain the weakening of society. Anomy according to him was a state where social and moral norms become entangled, blurry or absent which ultimately results in unacceptable behavior. He believed that the rise of unacceptable and deviant behavior was actually a result of institutional forces leading to anomy and suicide which inevitably results from the inequitable distribution of wealth and division of labor. This was the factor which he believed was a effect of reigning industrialization. Durkheim also believed that these conditions could also result from fluctuations and changes in economy or social systems. In these conditions society becomes powerless to implement an adaptable influence on expectations and actions. He argued that the main objective of society was to set standards to social desires by providing an ethical framework of self control. The concept of anomie states a phenomenon that occurs when there is a down fall in the social regulatory mechanisms and people do not have a clear notion of what is improper and adequate behavior. The division of labor is merely the division and specialization of work among individuals. As industry flourishes and population amplifies, society must be become more specific in order to survive. According to Durkheim, the sources of deregulation are: (i) The growth of industrial society, and (ii) The supremacy of the economy over other institutions. Durkheim emphasizes, as modernization and capitalism grabs a hold of Europe, a state of anomie is taking over the society. The social uneasiness is because of both social and economic reasons, which include disputed working relations between worker and ruler, due to the individualistic race for more salary - labor as designed by capitalism, and the people moving away from their moral values. Durkheim states that the new society has led people without any true beliefs in society. Everyone is living in a world which lacks morals and values which is essential to human existence. It is because of this concern Durkheim has given the proposition of re-organizing the society based on practices, sacred beliefs and norms. According to him, social regulation and moral discipline is essential for economic progress. The supremacy of economics replaces the authoritarian functions of other social institutions like religion. Religion gives instructions of self-control, and exerts a moral influence. Religion states that economic accomplishment is not the chief goal in life. But with the growth of highly developed economies the social values become redirected. The economic focus of society frees itself from prior moral limits and replaces ant kind of moral restraints. Ultimately, the enhancement in economics increases desires in the human race leading to distress and self-control become less acceptable than it was in the society where restraint was the norm. When the main focus of society is economic, there is greater risk of crisis. These are the main economic factors which have created the largest group of suicide. In Durkheim’s view, society sets wishes at such a high level that only a few individuals can achieve them. The main difference between the ideas of Marx and Durkheim is based on the concept of individual in a ‘state of nature’. Marx’s idea of alienation is established on the belief that man is ‘naturally’ good, but has been ruined by society. In contrast, Durkheim’s concept of anomie, assumes that man is ‘naturally’ a uncontrolled being, who must be severely controlled by the society. He states that egoism is a creation of the social order. However, both agree that the desire to economic advancement is a making of the modern capitalist society. Another differentiating factor in the views of Marx and Durkheim is that Durkheim considers that an individual’s personality is greatly influenced by the attitudes of the society in which he lives in and is socialized into, but also that in every individual has a struggle between morals and egoistic impulses. Marx does not approve such a psychological representation; he thought there is no asocial base for such clash between the individual and society. But for Marx, it is the individual who is the social being’. There is a similarity between the ideologies of anomie and alienation. Both Marx and Durkheim emphasize the fact that individual traits, motives and needs, are a product of social progression. Both recognize a flaw in the theory of political economy, which assumes that egoism is the foundation of social order. In the ideal sense, interconnectedness is the essential part of life and alienation has structurally imposed a breakdown. Anomie refers to a situation in which society brings unrestrained economic progress. While there might be a lot of similarities and differences between these, sometimes controversial sociologists – there is one thing that is undisputed and that is they have both had a great impact on the way the approach to sociology today. A classless society would show a social order with no economic basis. Many disagree that a modern classless society can exist. Marx and Durkheim both emphasized on the stratification of society into classes. Marx believes that the economic foundation of society has massive impact all fields of culture and social order. While both the sociologists agree with division of labor, but their belief differs in its resulting in different outcomes. Durkheim felt that the disparity in the division of labor could be conquered by giving importance to social norms and values. On the other hand, Marx felt that it is only struggle through which these inequalities could be removed. Still, both felt that class stratification reinforced the status quo and put forth massive pressure on beliefs regarding gender and race. Marx argued that competition amongst workers alienated them for each other. After all the stratification in the labor market individuals were further alienated from taking pleasure in life or finding satisfaction in it. Once again, the division of labor and conflict between capitalists and workers were crucial problems of modern society for Marx. Also, social classification played an essential part. The change from traditional to modern society was a very tough and relatively quicker. The people had to become accustomed to this quickly and were still uncertain of change in the society. Durkheim emphasized that it is the norms and values of a society that hold people together and help them to keep solidarity with each other. Workers mostly stayed in this state of oppression where happiness and self-satisfaction were difficult to achieve. Both the ruling and the working class have to find common identity in norms and values which would help in minimizing any sort of conflict or difference between them. Marx’s sociological theories are based on economics. He thought the society to be a resultant of an economic base and a social superstructure. According to him, it is the economy of a society which determines all other social institutions including religion ideology and politics. Marx believed that history is reliant on the existence of human beings, who produce their own means of living, and the resulting means of production decides their way of life. The economy which results from the means of production leads to the division of labor and types of property. There are three main types of property found in the past: ancient, tribal, and feudal. The tribal form of property follows the social set up of the family and is quite ancient; the ancient form of property follows the advancement of cities established from the union of different tribes; the feudal form is the result of the development of guilds of craftsmen and countries. Marx claims that political and social formations are resultant of economic means of production. Consciousness in individuals is also determined by the means of production; therefore, all beliefs derived from consciousness are part of the social superstructure. Therefore, for Marx, this entire social superstructure is determined by the economic base of a society. This economic base includes the division of labor - a division that has conflict between common and individual interests. Due to this the state, which is the result of the common interest of individuals, is contrasting to individual interest. It is only communal control and communism of the means of production that offers complete freedom from the cruelty of the common interest of the state which is imposes privatization of property and division of labor. Marx claims that the capitalist society serves only the interest of the ruling class by tyrannizing the collective interest of the working class. The only solution to this is a revolt in which the leading modes of production are removed completely. Thus, for Marx the economy is the reason of the consequential social superstructure. The inequality between the ruling class, due to the means of production, and the working class, which supplies the labor, results in a historical class combat. Marx expected that such class conflicts would ultimately terminate in a communistic revolution in which private ownership of the means of production and class disparities would be abolished. Unlike Marx, Durkheim considers that the economy is one of many contributing factors that make up a society. The economy has no special position in the social superstructure, but it is one of the social facts among others. Durkheim refers to a social fact as an external factor that has a force by which it exerts control over an individual. This control can be economic, but it can also be ideological. Durkheim creates a distinction between social facts from biological or psychological facts. Sociology is illustrious by the study of societal truths. The beliefs, tendencies, practices of groups taking place collectively constitute of social facts. These also include the economy, but are much greater than that. Durkheim moves far ahead of the economic analyses of class differences found in Marx, and while a reformist motive can be found in Durkheim it is not completely economic. According to Durkheim, Marx’s theory gives a rule of method, not a law from which one is correct in assuming significant consequences, whether practical or theoretical. Durkheim thought religion to be a vital part of the economy as well as other ideologies. Durkheim emphasized that it was much more possible that it is the economy which is dependent on religion. Marx and Durkheim, both agree that the economy is an imperative element of social organization. But differ in regards to the position that the economy has in relation to society. For Marx, the economy is the fundamental foundation of all following social occurrences. According to him, it is the ruling class (bourgeois), which owns the means of production, and exploits the working class (proletariat) through the division of labor and wage-slavery. This causes a long history of class differences that has rooted in modern capitalist society. It is this capitalism that is setting up the approach for a communist revolution, in which the means of production owned by the ruling class would no longer be privatized, and the division of labor would be completely abolished. Marx further predicts that this would lead to the freedom of the proletariat and the termination of private property. Unlike Marx, Durkheim views a positive relationship between the society and economy. The economy and all the related social classifications of labor have a valuable effect on society, and ensure social solidarity. Durkheim views society not in terms of economic factors like Marx, but in terms of health and illness. Social phenomenon as suicide and insanity are more of apprehension for Durkheim than modes of production and worker alienation. Therefore, Durkheim suggests a reorganization to reduce the harmful effects of suicide and other illness in society, but Durkheim does not agree that such illness is economically determined or that a communist revolution is inevitable. Marx thought the ideologies to be the result of economics. Although Durkheim did not bring down religion to an economic determinant, he did consider religion to be an essential social concept and traced its roots to the beginnings of human society. While differing in many aspects, these classical sociologists all share insights that have proven relevant to modern times. Capitalism, the division of labor, class struggles, religious ideologies, and productive forces are all still with us today. And the struggle to gain understanding of the relationship between the economy and society has been greatly aided by their substantial theories. Reference: 1. Anonymous (2004). Karl and Durkheim. Retrieved February 19, 2009 from http://www.studentworkzone.com/question.php?ID=60 2. Anonymous (2003). The worlds and ideas of Karl Marx. Retrieved February 19, 2009 from http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/TUmarx.htm 3. Callinicos, A. (2004). The Revolutionary ideas of Karl Marx. Australia: Bookmarks Publications, Ltd. 4. Franklin, C. (2001). A Comparison of Marx and Durkheims theories of the Structure of Modern Society. Retrieved February 19, 2009 from http://www.planetpaper .com/Assets/811.php 5. Smelser, N. J. & Wed berg, R. (2005). The handbook of Economic Sociology. New York: Princeton University Press Read More