WEBVTT

00:00.770 --> 00:02.280
Prof: Good morning.

00:02.280 --> 00:07.060
Now we move to our last author
in this course,

00:09.930 --> 00:14.970
There are really two Durkheims.

00:14.970 --> 00:21.900
We have seen certainly two
Marxs and two Webers.

00:25.680 --> 00:32.290
To put it bluntly,
the young Durkheim has been a

00:32.289 --> 00:40.569
functionalist and a positivist,
and then late in his life he

00:40.565 --> 00:47.195
has--his epistemological turn--
he became a cultural analyst.

00:47.200 --> 00:51.630
Well it's not quite true,
because each author is more

00:51.627 --> 00:56.817
complex, and there were already
elements of his culturalism in

00:56.822 --> 00:58.442
the early work.

00:58.440 --> 01:03.900
But there was certainly a
dramatic change in the way how

01:03.899 --> 01:09.259
Durkheim conceived what the job
of social sciences,

01:09.260 --> 01:13.180
later in his life,
in his book The Elementary

01:13.183 --> 01:15.693
Forms of Religious Life.

01:15.688 --> 01:19.728
I think it had a lot to do also
with his personal life,

01:19.727 --> 01:21.967
and we will talk about this.

01:21.970 --> 01:26.390
He was brought up in a
rabbinical family and was

01:26.388 --> 01:31.438
supposed to become a rabbi,
and then he revolted against

01:31.444 --> 01:36.384
the parental household--
much like Nietzsche did--and

01:36.379 --> 01:42.219
turned probably into an atheist,
but certainly not an active

01:42.221 --> 01:43.991
believer in Judaism.

01:43.989 --> 01:49.699
And later in his life he became
again interested in religion,

01:49.703 --> 01:54.563
and not only philosophically,
but also existentially

01:54.559 --> 01:57.129
interested in religion.

01:57.129 --> 02:03.239
Well in the course we have only
four lectures on Durkheim.

02:03.239 --> 02:07.339
So I'll leave Durkheim the
culturalist out,

02:07.340 --> 02:13.080
and we will be doing work only
on his earlier work,

02:13.080 --> 02:18.570
The Division of Labor,
the wonderful book

02:18.568 --> 02:22.928
Suicide,
and a somewhat difficult book,

02:22.925 --> 02:26.005
The Rules of Sociological
Method.

02:26.008 --> 02:35.318
And I'll just leave The
Elementary Forms of Religious

02:35.318 --> 02:39.368
Life;
I don't have time to fit this

02:39.372 --> 02:39.872
into.

02:39.870 --> 02:45.730
Durkheim had an extraordinary
impact on American social

02:45.734 --> 02:46.824
science.

02:46.818 --> 02:51.508
Initially it was particularly
the younger Durkheim,

02:51.508 --> 02:56.758
the functionalist Durkheim,
who had such an extraordinary

02:56.758 --> 02:57.788
impact.

02:57.788 --> 03:04.848
Unlike Weber or Marx,
whose impact was broad and

03:04.853 --> 03:13.273
affected history and economics
and political science,

03:13.270 --> 03:17.460
Durkheim's impact was much more
focused on sociology.

03:17.460 --> 03:22.310
So in this course the only
author who, properly speaking,

03:26.120 --> 03:31.470
All the others you discussed
were not really identified

03:31.473 --> 03:34.353
themselves as sociologists.

03:34.348 --> 03:42.168
Later in his life Weber did,
but not on the whole.

03:47.702 --> 03:50.412
project as sociology.

03:50.410 --> 03:54.510
It, of course,
has a lot to do that these

03:54.508 --> 03:59.118
disciplinary boundaries between
economics,

03:59.120 --> 04:02.040
political science,
and sociology became much more

04:02.043 --> 04:05.763
sharply drawn by the end of the
nineteenth and early twentieth

04:05.758 --> 04:09.378
century,
and sociology as an academic

04:09.384 --> 04:13.844
discipline was really
established by the late

04:13.841 --> 04:16.071
nineteenth century.

04:20.625 --> 04:21.465
in 1917.

04:21.470 --> 04:25.280
Just very briefly about his
life.

04:29.449 --> 04:35.199
As I said, his father was a
rabbi and he was expected to

04:35.204 --> 04:37.824
become a rabbi himself.

04:45.774 --> 04:50.894
elite schools,
MIT version in France,

04:50.887 --> 04:57.937
and by the time he went to
university--

05:01.600 --> 05:07.350
university--
he lost his religious beliefs.

05:07.350 --> 05:13.420
He was for some time a
professor at the University of

05:13.415 --> 05:14.695
Bordeaux.

05:14.699 --> 05:18.639
Then he became politically
active in the 1940s,

05:18.637 --> 05:22.487
especially in the so-called
Dreyfus Affair;

05:22.490 --> 05:26.060
and I will just briefly mention
what that was.

05:26.060 --> 05:30.550
Then in 1902,
he became professor at the

05:30.545 --> 05:34.505
University of Paris,
which is not quite as

05:38.110 --> 05:45.660
His son was killed in the war,
and shortly after this he died

05:45.663 --> 05:47.053
in Paris.

05:47.050 --> 05:49.740
So this is Alfred Dreyfus.

05:49.740 --> 05:54.740
This is a very important event
in French, and in many ways in

05:54.742 --> 05:56.412
European, history.

05:56.410 --> 05:59.000
What was the Dreyfus Affair?

05:59.000 --> 06:00.470
You probably all know.

06:00.470 --> 06:04.940
In 1894, Dreyfus,
who was Jewish,

06:04.935 --> 06:13.445
was falsely accused to be a
German spy, and was imprisoned.

06:13.449 --> 06:19.199
That was obviously an
anti-Semitic trial,

06:19.199 --> 06:22.779
and this mobilized the French
intellectuals,

06:22.778 --> 06:25.408
and not only French
intellectuals,

06:25.411 --> 06:28.681
but French intellectuals in
particular.

06:33.790 --> 06:38.800
the leading French writer of
this epoch,

06:38.800 --> 06:43.790
wrote an important article
which appeared in the leading

06:43.788 --> 06:47.688
French daily newspaper:
J'Accuse--

06:47.690 --> 06:51.820
"I accuse the French
judiciary of being

06:51.822 --> 06:53.842
anti-Semitic."

06:53.839 --> 06:59.139
Well Durkheim joined other
prominent French intellectuals

06:59.141 --> 07:01.321
to protest the trial.

07:01.319 --> 07:04.609
It took them a long time but
eventually they were successful.

07:04.610 --> 07:10.130
Dreyfus was eventually
exonerated of all charges and

07:10.129 --> 07:14.349
made a Knight of the Legion of
Honor.

07:14.350 --> 07:20.110
So it was a happy ending of
French anti-Semitism,

07:20.110 --> 07:21.670
for awhile.

07:21.670 --> 07:26.000
Then it came back with
vengeance during the occupation,

07:25.997 --> 07:27.437
Nazi occupation.

07:27.439 --> 07:32.249
The French are not as innocent
about anti-Semitism as you may

07:32.254 --> 07:33.944
want to believe it.

07:33.940 --> 07:37.750
Many were collaborating with
the Nazis.

07:37.750 --> 07:40.080
Well about the work.

07:40.079 --> 07:45.579
In '93 he wrote a dissertation,
which probably is still his

07:45.579 --> 07:49.319
most influential book,
The Division of Labor in

07:49.319 --> 07:52.029
Society,
and today's lecture will be

07:52.029 --> 07:53.289
focused on this.

07:53.290 --> 07:56.800
'95, it was followed by
The Rules of

07:56.798 --> 08:01.008
Sociological Method,
which is his most positivistic

08:01.007 --> 08:02.097
statement.

08:02.100 --> 08:06.000
The Division of Labor is
his most functionalist work.

08:06.000 --> 08:11.080
And then in '97 he wrote
Suicide.

08:11.079 --> 08:14.819
Suicide is a very
important book because it's

08:14.824 --> 08:18.504
really the first piece of
rigorous empirical social

08:18.495 --> 08:23.165
science,
which takes a very unusual,

08:23.165 --> 08:27.465
very rare phenomenon,
like suicide,

08:27.471 --> 08:32.921
and crunches numbers extremely
carefully to test whether he can

08:32.916 --> 08:38.006
identify social determinants of
such a rare phenomenon.

08:38.009 --> 08:42.319
Fortunately even in countries
where many people commit

08:42.317 --> 08:45.567
suicide, it's still a rare
phenomenon.

08:45.570 --> 08:51.280
But he managed to come up with
a very provocative theory,

08:51.280 --> 08:57.400
what he demonstrated with very
careful empirical analysis.

08:57.399 --> 09:02.489
We will be looking at two parts
of The Division of Labor.

09:02.490 --> 09:07.670
Today we will be looking at the
major arguments of Division

09:07.666 --> 09:08.936
of Labor.

09:08.940 --> 09:16.870
And then also we will look at,
Thursday,

09:16.870 --> 09:21.560
on his theory of anomie,
which is a central piece of the

09:21.557 --> 09:25.257
book,
Division of Labor,

09:25.264 --> 09:29.504
but a kind of by-the-way
analysis.

09:29.500 --> 09:38.310
And, as I said,
in 1915 he wrote this book,

09:38.308 --> 09:40.128
The Elementary Forms of
Religious Life,

09:40.129 --> 09:44.109
which is a major break in his
work,

09:44.110 --> 09:49.320
and shows his renewed interest
in the spiritual and the

09:49.322 --> 09:50.772
metaphysical.

09:50.769 --> 09:54.949
Okay, just very briefly,
what is in the books.

09:54.950 --> 09:58.560
As I said, The
Division of Labour was

09:58.556 --> 09:59.206
his Ph.D.

09:59.205 --> 10:00.355
dissertation.

10:00.360 --> 10:05.000
But unlike many scholars whose
only good book is their

10:05.004 --> 10:08.774
dissertation,
Durkheim followed it up with a

10:08.773 --> 10:11.493
number of good other books.

10:11.490 --> 10:16.660
Many professors are actually
one book people,

10:16.658 --> 10:19.978
or at least they should have
been, because their only good

10:19.976 --> 10:23.406
book was the dissertation and
what they published later only

10:23.408 --> 10:25.908
published because 'publish or
perish'--

10:25.909 --> 10:29.399
right?--to get tenure;
that's why they probably

10:29.403 --> 10:30.883
published too many books.

10:30.879 --> 10:34.929
Anyway, he was inspired by
Montesquieu.

10:34.928 --> 10:40.748
Well Durkheim is very French,
and his roots are deeply in

10:40.749 --> 10:45.529
Montesquieu, and to some extent
in Rousseau;

10:45.529 --> 10:47.859
he admired Rousseau as well.

10:47.860 --> 10:55.240
But Montesquieu is really the
major inspiration behind him.

10:55.240 --> 10:58.950
And well what he does,
he uses law as a measure of

10:58.946 --> 11:05.856
social development--
much like Montesquieu did,

11:05.860 --> 11:09.640
sort of--
and he explains,

11:09.640 --> 11:14.160
by using the law,
the legal system how the

11:14.155 --> 11:19.225
division of labor evolved,
what were the stages of the

11:19.230 --> 11:21.460
development of division of
labor.

11:21.460 --> 11:25.230
Well just a very brief
contrast.

11:25.226 --> 11:26.196
Right?

11:26.200 --> 11:32.120
Marx was interested in economic
conflict--right?--in struggle

11:32.124 --> 11:35.584
around scarce economic
resources.

11:35.580 --> 11:39.680
Weber was interested in
struggle for power.

11:39.679 --> 11:41.119
So was Nietzsche.

11:41.120 --> 11:44.910
Durkheim was interested in
social solidarity.

11:44.908 --> 11:49.958
Marx and Weber are conflict
theorists.

11:49.960 --> 11:53.340
They try to explain what breaks
up society.

11:53.340 --> 11:58.930
Durkheim is a theorist which
tries to understand what holds

11:58.928 --> 12:02.878
society together,
what brings us together,

12:02.879 --> 12:05.959
why society is not falling
apart.

12:05.962 --> 12:07.122
Right?

12:07.120 --> 12:12.970
Well in the book he makes a
crucial distinction between two

12:12.970 --> 12:17.210
types of solidarity:
mechanical and organic

12:17.206 --> 12:18.716
solidarity.

12:18.720 --> 12:24.610
And I will speak about this at
great length.

12:24.610 --> 12:29.460
This is another attempt to
develop a typology of evolution

12:29.455 --> 12:30.725
of societies.

12:30.730 --> 12:33.820
You are already familiar with
Marx's modes of

12:33.817 --> 12:37.177
production--right?--the
evolution from slavery to

12:37.184 --> 12:39.154
feudalism to capitalism.

12:39.149 --> 12:43.449
You are familiar with Max
Weber: traditional authority and

12:43.445 --> 12:45.475
legal-rational authority.

12:45.480 --> 12:50.410
Now Durkheim's alternative is
mechanical and organic

12:50.407 --> 12:51.467
solidarity.

12:51.470 --> 12:52.340
Right?

12:52.340 --> 12:57.310
What Weber called traditional
authority is kind of mechanical

12:57.313 --> 13:01.253
solidarity for Durkheim;
or what Marx called

13:01.245 --> 13:06.105
pre-capitalist formations is
mechanical solidarity.

13:06.110 --> 13:10.980
Organic solidarity described
legal-rational authority or

13:10.977 --> 13:13.277
modernity or capitalism.

13:13.278 --> 13:19.348
Well he also identified
pathological forms of division

13:19.350 --> 13:24.620
of labor, and this is what he
called anomie.

13:24.620 --> 13:30.250
And his idea of anomie is a
kind of similar or analogous

13:30.253 --> 13:34.533
distinction,
what was alienation in Marx and

13:34.533 --> 13:37.633
what was disenchantment in
Weber--

13:37.629 --> 13:42.839
though there are very important
differences as well,

13:42.840 --> 13:45.180
and I will be talking about
this Thursday.

13:45.178 --> 13:49.488
Now on Suicide--as I
said, this is one of the first

13:49.491 --> 13:53.881
very rigorous empirical studies
of a social phenomenon--

13:53.879 --> 13:57.219
a phenomenon we think is not
quite social,

13:57.220 --> 14:00.760
we think it is really an
individual decision whether you

14:00.763 --> 14:02.313
take your life or not.

14:02.308 --> 14:06.568
But Durkheim actually was
capable to show that even in

14:06.568 --> 14:10.198
this very private action,
when you take your life,

14:10.195 --> 14:15.265
there are social determinants,
who is committing suicide or

14:15.270 --> 14:15.850
not.

14:15.850 --> 14:19.340
And he's making a distinction
between different types of

14:19.341 --> 14:22.331
suicide--
anomic, altruistic,

14:22.331 --> 14:28.421
egoistic and fatalistic ones--
and I will be talking about

14:28.421 --> 14:32.691
this after you return from
Thanksgiving's break.

14:32.690 --> 14:34.670
Now about the methodology.

14:34.668 --> 14:37.768
He was a methodological
collectivist,

14:37.774 --> 14:42.434
much like Montesquieu or
Rousseau, and very much unlike

14:42.431 --> 14:46.651
Hobbes, Locke or Mills;
you know, Marx being kind of

14:46.645 --> 14:50.885
halfway between methodological
individualism and collectivism.

14:50.889 --> 14:54.739
As a theorist of revolutionary
consciousness,

14:54.738 --> 14:58.148
he was a methodological
collectivist.

14:58.149 --> 15:03.299
We will see Durkheim's notion
of collective conscience is not

15:03.303 --> 15:08.633
all that different from Marx's
idea of class consciousness,

15:08.629 --> 15:11.739
which is not the sum
total--right?--

15:11.740 --> 15:14.480
of the individual consciousness
of workers.

15:14.480 --> 15:18.340
But Marx, in his theory of
exploitation,

15:18.336 --> 15:23.766
as you have read his text,
reads almost like Adam Smith,

15:23.774 --> 15:25.754
or John Stuart Mill.

15:25.751 --> 15:26.841
Right?

15:26.840 --> 15:30.110
It's self-interested,
rational individuals,

15:30.105 --> 15:34.145
from which he explains the
nature of exploitation.

15:34.149 --> 15:39.299
Well it's much more difficult
to figure out how Weber fits

15:39.301 --> 15:41.471
into these categories.

15:41.470 --> 15:45.650
I think he's also vacillating
between collectivism and

15:45.648 --> 15:46.908
individualism.

15:46.908 --> 15:49.828
Later in his life he's becoming
more of a methodological

15:49.830 --> 15:50.680
individualist.

15:50.678 --> 15:53.368
But Durkheim,
the consistency in Durkheim,

15:53.365 --> 15:56.965
is that from day one he's a
methodological collectivist,

15:56.966 --> 15:59.976
and remains a methodological
collectivist.

15:59.980 --> 16:04.930
But at the same time he
believed in the existence of

16:04.927 --> 16:08.577
social facts,
and that social facts,

16:08.580 --> 16:13.150
on the other hand,
can be observed with rigorous

16:13.149 --> 16:17.989
empirical methodology;
and this is what makes him,

16:17.990 --> 16:20.420
in a way, a positivist.

16:20.418 --> 16:27.448
So this is just a brief
introduction to who the author

16:27.447 --> 16:28.107
is.

16:28.110 --> 16:32.590
And now let me move to the
division of labor.

16:32.590 --> 16:58.780
>

16:58.779 --> 17:03.099
Well my computer is getting
slower, as the semester is

17:03.099 --> 17:04.239
progressing.

17:04.240 --> 17:07.920
So it's probably time for the
semester to end,

17:07.915 --> 17:10.775
because my laptop,
though it is new,

17:10.775 --> 17:16.325
it still will become unbearably
slow by the end of the semester.

17:21.430 --> 17:23.130
labor in society.

17:23.130 --> 17:29.680
So how does Durkheim proceed in
the work?

17:29.680 --> 17:35.940
And today's presentation will
focus on the question why

17:35.938 --> 17:43.008
Durkheim begins the analysis by
taking the law as the point of

17:43.007 --> 17:44.627
departure.

17:44.630 --> 17:56.240
And then we will proceed how he
makes the distinction between

17:56.236 --> 18:03.196
organic and mechanical
solidarity.

18:03.200 --> 18:07.680
So the question actually is,
for a methodological

18:07.676 --> 18:14.046
collectivist,
that you need to find some

18:14.051 --> 18:21.771
collective expression,
in order to study society--not

18:21.769 --> 18:23.159
individuals.

18:23.160 --> 18:29.470
And much like Montesquieu,
he believes that the law is

18:29.469 --> 18:36.209
such a collective phenomenon;
law, which can be studied and

18:36.212 --> 18:42.322
established without studying
individual views or individual

18:42.318 --> 18:43.268
opinions.

18:43.267 --> 18:44.317
Right?

18:44.318 --> 18:51.108
It's parts of what--Durkheim's
terminology is the collective

18:51.112 --> 18:58.022
conscience, and which is above
individual consciousnesses.

18:58.019 --> 19:07.459
Okay, so that's--what are the
most important issues in the

19:07.459 --> 19:14.249
work, as far as we'll discuss it
today?

19:14.250 --> 19:18.420
Well he's interested in
solidarity.

19:18.420 --> 19:25.940
As I pointed out,
we are--his real question is

19:25.938 --> 19:30.948
what holds society together?

19:30.950 --> 19:34.200
We are so different,
societies should fall apart.

19:34.198 --> 19:34.738
Right?

19:34.740 --> 19:38.540
He is writing in the late
nineteenth, early twentieth

19:38.538 --> 19:39.268
century.

19:39.269 --> 19:42.179
This is the time of
industrialization,

19:42.175 --> 19:43.585
of urbanization.

19:43.588 --> 19:48.938
People are dislodged from their
traditional communities,

19:48.940 --> 19:53.610
from the traditional villages,
pushed away from peasant

19:53.612 --> 19:56.972
agriculture,
and move into urban industrial

19:56.967 --> 19:57.787
employment.

19:57.788 --> 20:01.808
And the question is will
society break down,

20:01.809 --> 20:07.229
will social order break down,
if the traditional order does

20:07.231 --> 20:09.571
not keep us together?

20:09.568 --> 20:12.328
And this is what he tries to
figure out;

20:12.328 --> 20:18.078
what in a modern urban and
industrial society can keep us

20:18.079 --> 20:19.209
together?

20:19.210 --> 20:22.510
And he tries to find solidarity.

20:22.509 --> 20:31.069
And well what creates this
solidarity is collective

20:31.069 --> 20:33.809
consciousness.

20:33.808 --> 20:39.248
And the fundamental idea in
Durkheim about collective

20:39.250 --> 20:44.930
consciousness--
as I said, it is analogous to

20:44.929 --> 20:50.979
the notion of the general will
in Rousseau,

20:50.980 --> 20:56.220
or the notion of class
consciousness in Marx.

20:56.220 --> 21:00.580
So therefore it is not the sum
total of individual

21:00.578 --> 21:06.608
consciousnesses,
but something of shared norms,

21:06.611 --> 21:13.251
beliefs and values,
which exist prior an individual

21:13.250 --> 21:17.880
is being born,
prior society actually existed,

21:17.878 --> 21:22.428
which is passed on from one
generation to the other.

21:22.434 --> 21:23.244
Right?

21:23.240 --> 21:27.930
And therefore he tries to
show--right?--these collective

21:27.929 --> 21:31.509
consciousnesses which persist
over time.

21:31.509 --> 21:34.869
And, of course,
the most obvious,

21:34.867 --> 21:40.427
most rigorous way to go about
this, to look at law.

21:40.430 --> 21:43.240
Because that's exactly what the
law is.

21:43.238 --> 21:43.828
Right?

21:43.828 --> 21:49.888
The law is changing over time,
but usually the change is very

21:49.893 --> 21:54.343
slow and reaches over several
generations.

21:54.338 --> 21:59.768
So for somebody who is a French
social scientist,

21:59.770 --> 22:05.090
and one unique--we already
talked about this.

22:05.088 --> 22:09.778
Well the French are very
methodological collectivists.

22:09.778 --> 22:14.028
The Anglo-Saxons tend to be
methodological individualists.

22:14.028 --> 22:17.568
And the French,
unlike the Germans,

22:17.570 --> 22:23.260
are very scientifique;
they are very much scientists.

22:23.259 --> 22:30.259
The word scientifique in
German does not exist.

22:30.259 --> 22:32.509
The Germans say,
"I'm

22:32.513 --> 22:37.433
Wissenschaftler";
Wissenschaft

22:37.434 --> 22:41.354
means--Wissen is
knowledge.

22:41.348 --> 22:47.478
Science in German is
constituted by all sorts of

22:47.480 --> 22:48.790
knowledge.

22:48.785 --> 22:49.955
Right?

22:49.960 --> 22:51.710
It's a much broader notion.

22:51.713 --> 22:52.173
Right?

22:52.170 --> 22:56.400
In French, or in English,
with science we really mean

22:56.396 --> 23:00.296
rigorous science of the natural
science types.

23:00.298 --> 23:05.498
Well Durkheim did not go as far
as saying it is natural science.

23:05.500 --> 23:09.900
But certainly he was very
scientifique in

23:09.897 --> 23:14.477
insistence of rigorous analysis
of objective data.

23:14.483 --> 23:15.423
Right?

23:15.420 --> 23:18.470
That's what--why the
Germans--Wiss

23:18.468 --> 23:22.278
enschaftler,
all those who study ideas are

23:22.278 --> 23:24.648
Wissenschaftlers.

23:24.650 --> 23:27.370
It's a much broader notion.

23:27.368 --> 23:29.868
Natural scientists are also
Wissenschaftlers.

23:29.868 --> 23:33.988
But people who study humanities
and history of ideas are also

23:33.986 --> 23:35.766
Wissenschaftlers.

23:35.769 --> 23:40.179
People who are an expert on
Hobbes and spend their life

23:40.182 --> 23:43.452
writing on Hobbes is a
Wissenschaftler

23:43.451 --> 23:45.741
--right?--in German.

23:45.740 --> 23:50.880
We can hardly say somebody who
does--right?--history of ideas

23:50.884 --> 23:52.434
to be a scientist.

23:52.428 --> 23:53.198
Right?

23:53.200 --> 23:54.760
We are iffy.

23:54.759 --> 23:56.319
We call it humanities.

23:56.318 --> 24:00.848
We talk about social sciences
with a lot of anxiety,

24:00.846 --> 24:05.106
and real scientists ask us,
"Social science,

24:05.105 --> 24:06.965
what do you mean?

24:06.970 --> 24:09.080
What is science about what you
are doing?"

24:09.078 --> 24:12.358
Well those of you who take
economics, they make sure it

24:12.356 --> 24:14.966
looks like science,
because you have all the

24:14.967 --> 24:16.907
equations on the blackboard.

24:16.910 --> 24:20.970
So therefore a scientist can
relax.

24:20.970 --> 24:25.240
But if you are listening to my
lectures, and not a single

24:25.240 --> 24:29.440
equation on the blackboard,
you probably have doubt that

24:29.435 --> 24:32.025
this is really social science.

24:32.028 --> 24:34.628
Anyway, he was
scientifique,

24:34.634 --> 24:38.774
in the sense of being very
rigorous in his analysis.

24:38.769 --> 24:46.899
Sort of what is collective
consciousness--I give here a

24:46.895 --> 24:49.445
citation for you.

24:49.454 --> 24:50.814
Right?

24:50.808 --> 24:57.348
It is a totality of beliefs and
sentiments which are common to

24:57.346 --> 25:03.026
the average member of
society--right?--but which has a

25:03.026 --> 25:04.736
life of its own.

25:04.740 --> 25:05.920
Right?

25:05.920 --> 25:13.210
That's what he calls collective
consciousness.

25:13.210 --> 25:17.380
So this is different from the
consciousnesses of the

25:17.384 --> 25:25.144
individuals;
though he's a scientist. Right?

25:25.140 --> 25:27.030
He's scientifique.

25:27.028 --> 25:30.918
It has to be realized in
individuals.

25:30.920 --> 25:34.520
So therefore,
I mean, Durkheim would not

25:34.519 --> 25:40.059
necessarily be opposed to carry
out even survey research,

25:40.058 --> 25:45.518
and ask individuals about their
customs or values,

25:45.519 --> 25:50.329
and sort of aggregate this up
and try to find those patterns,

25:50.328 --> 25:53.558
especially over time and across
nations.

25:53.559 --> 25:55.439
That's not really what he did.

25:55.440 --> 25:59.840
But I think he would be open
for this kind of research,

25:59.838 --> 26:03.238
which, of course,
made him so influential in

26:03.243 --> 26:06.493
early American sociology in the
1930s,

26:06.490 --> 26:11.250
'40s and '50s,
because American sociology has

26:11.248 --> 26:15.788
been very positivist and very
empirical.

26:15.788 --> 26:21.548
Well but the most obvious
example of collective conscience

26:21.553 --> 26:25.703
is the law--probably also the
language.

26:25.700 --> 26:31.100
Well there are differences in
law in pre-modern and modern

26:31.102 --> 26:32.242
societies.

26:32.240 --> 26:38.940
Now we are getting into--he's
building the argument up to make

26:38.939 --> 26:43.879
the distinction between
mechanical and organic

26:43.882 --> 26:45.532
solidarity.

26:45.529 --> 26:50.599
And let me just go through of
this.

26:50.598 --> 26:57.538
<<technical
adjustment>>

26:57.538 --> 27:03.928
So the argument is then in
pre-modern societies the law

27:03.934 --> 27:10.454
which existed is primarily a
repressive or penal law.

27:10.450 --> 27:17.900
Well there is--the purpose of
punishment is to punish evil

27:17.901 --> 27:19.341
behavior.

27:19.338 --> 27:24.628
And we tend to agree what is
evil behavior is,

27:24.630 --> 27:28.570
and punishments therefore also
tends to be harsh,

27:28.568 --> 27:38.838
to prevent further aggressive
behavior by individuals.

27:38.838 --> 27:45.328
So this is the legal system of
pre-modern societies.

27:45.328 --> 27:49.668
Well I will give you a couple
of citations,

27:49.670 --> 27:52.150
and I won't read them.

27:52.150 --> 27:56.880
I will put them on the internet
and you can read it at your

27:56.875 --> 27:57.685
leisure.

27:57.690 --> 28:03.410
It kind of elaborates on the
points what I made.

28:03.410 --> 28:14.370
Okay, but in modern society the
legal system is very different.

28:14.368 --> 28:19.218
The legal system is based on
contract;

28:19.220 --> 28:22.470
the essence of modern legal
system is contract.

28:22.470 --> 28:26.320
It's not that we do not have a
penal code--right?--the penal

28:26.324 --> 28:27.374
code survives.

28:27.368 --> 28:32.818
But what is novel is
contractual law,

28:32.817 --> 28:38.707
which is restitutive;
which is not about punishing

28:38.705 --> 28:42.655
evil, but simply restitute the
damage somebody,

28:42.660 --> 28:47.300
by breaking a contract,
caused to the other contracting

28:47.300 --> 28:47.990
partner.

28:47.988 --> 28:49.018
Right?

28:49.019 --> 28:53.129
And he said,
well this is a new type of law

28:53.133 --> 28:56.173
which emerges with modernity.

28:56.170 --> 29:03.330
Marx would say it is a new
legal system which emerges with

29:03.328 --> 29:06.028
legal--
with capitalism,

29:06.026 --> 29:11.506
and Weber would say this is the
essence of legal-rational

29:11.507 --> 29:12.777
authority.

29:12.779 --> 29:24.249
Well why does he study law?

29:24.250 --> 29:27.550
I don't want to elaborate on
this too long.

29:27.548 --> 29:34.028
That's obvious-- that the legal
system is the single best

29:34.025 --> 29:38.415
measure of what he tries to get
at,

29:38.420 --> 29:42.250
collective conscience,
which can be studied the most

29:42.251 --> 29:43.151
objectively.

29:43.153 --> 29:43.833
Right?

29:43.828 --> 29:48.718
There are law books and legal
practices and minutes of

29:48.721 --> 29:52.231
recordings how the courts
operated,

29:52.230 --> 29:55.950
and how law was made and
implemented,

29:55.950 --> 30:01.810
which can be studied with a
great level of rigor.

30:01.808 --> 30:06.498
For instance,
it's very easy to study whether

30:06.498 --> 30:11.398
indeed contractual law is a new
form of law.

30:11.400 --> 30:16.090
You can go back to legal
history and to establish exactly

30:16.085 --> 30:18.675
when contractual law emerged.

30:18.680 --> 30:24.260
This was actually also very
much on the mind of the young

30:24.261 --> 30:27.341
Weber,
when he was also looking at

30:27.338 --> 30:32.018
basically the emergence of
contractual law in late medieval

30:32.021 --> 30:36.681
Italy,
in his Ph.D.

30:36.680 --> 30:38.620
for the law degree.

30:38.618 --> 30:43.088
I think I already made this
point, what is interesting,

30:43.090 --> 30:47.480
that Durkheim and Weber sort of
ignored each other.

30:47.480 --> 30:50.740
I don't think they ever cited
each other.

30:50.740 --> 30:55.330
I don't recall ever seeing a
citation to one another,

30:55.327 --> 30:59.207
though they were working on the
same area.

30:59.210 --> 31:03.120
Of course, they both did speak
both of the languages,

31:03.118 --> 31:06.498
and they were,
of course, aware that the other

31:06.501 --> 31:07.781
giant exists.

31:07.778 --> 31:09.878
They were probably,
in many ways,

31:09.884 --> 31:13.374
too close--too much in
competition with each other--to

31:13.373 --> 31:14.693
cite each other.

31:14.690 --> 31:19.380
I mentioned already that
Durkheim did review Marianne

31:19.376 --> 31:22.616
Weber's book,
but never any of Weber's books,

31:22.624 --> 31:26.504
though Marianne was writing--
right?--about marriage law,

31:26.502 --> 31:30.062
which was of marginal interest
to Durkheim,

31:30.058 --> 31:33.768
and Weber was writing on
religion, which was so central

31:33.766 --> 31:35.616
for Durkheim's interests.

31:35.618 --> 31:40.558
Nevertheless they kind of
ignored each other.

31:40.558 --> 31:44.768
Now about the two types of
solidarity.

31:44.769 --> 31:50.629
Well mechanical
solidarity--it's hard to

31:50.625 --> 31:54.675
remember the distinction.

31:54.680 --> 31:57.570
One would think organic
solidarity must be

31:57.574 --> 32:01.744
old--right?--and mechanical must
be modern, the machines.

32:01.740 --> 32:04.020
Now the opposite is true.

32:04.019 --> 32:08.249
I kept making these mistakes
for the first two or three years

32:08.250 --> 32:12.270
when I was reading Durkheim,
some forty-five years ago.

32:12.269 --> 32:20.609
Well mechanical solidarity is
which describes pre-modern

32:20.613 --> 32:29.113
societies, and this is a
solidarity which is based on the

32:29.107 --> 32:33.657
similarities of the parts.

32:33.660 --> 32:39.250
Well this is why you can have a
penal law, because a penal law

32:39.250 --> 32:44.660
does not make a distinction
between contractual partners;

32:44.660 --> 32:49.310
it assumes a sameness of the
group as such.

32:49.308 --> 32:56.058
And mechanical
solidarity--right?--as I said,

32:56.056 --> 33:05.866
is primarily based that we see
ourselves similar in the group.

33:05.868 --> 33:10.458
Organic solidarity,
so will Durkheim argue,

33:10.458 --> 33:15.918
is one which is based on
differences in society.

33:15.920 --> 33:20.770
A higher level of division of
labor in society produces

33:20.765 --> 33:22.645
organic solidarity.

33:22.650 --> 33:25.620
Organic, he meant,
it is a kind of biological

33:25.615 --> 33:26.285
analogy.

33:26.288 --> 33:29.908
Modern societies,
like the human body.

33:29.914 --> 33:30.704
Right?

33:30.700 --> 33:33.570
There are functional
differences between the human

33:33.571 --> 33:34.101
organs.

33:34.098 --> 33:36.528
That's why it is organic
solidarity.

33:36.525 --> 33:37.075
Right?

33:37.078 --> 33:40.988
The heart performs a different
function than the lung,

33:40.986 --> 33:44.296
but the lung could not live
without the heart.

33:44.301 --> 33:45.041
Right?

33:45.038 --> 33:47.818
This is why this is organic
solidarity.

33:47.818 --> 33:51.608
Society operates more like an
organism.

33:51.608 --> 33:55.448
In earlier times,
society was more operating like

33:55.450 --> 33:59.370
a machine where you actually--a
part is taken out,

33:59.368 --> 34:02.888
mechanically it doesn't matter
all that much.

34:02.890 --> 34:03.850
Right?

34:03.849 --> 34:06.269
It is a simple machine, I mean.

34:06.269 --> 34:10.309
So that's the fundamental
distinction.

34:10.309 --> 34:14.149
By the way, also for
Durkheim--and this is also in

34:14.146 --> 34:18.736
the text what you are reading--
this distinction between

34:18.744 --> 34:23.284
mechanical and organic
solidarity is developed in order

34:23.278 --> 34:26.048
to describe societies as such.

34:26.050 --> 34:30.720
But much like Weber's notion of
traditional authority and

34:30.715 --> 34:37.245
legal-rational authority,
he is also using this to

34:37.246 --> 34:42.516
understand society--
social solidarities in

34:42.518 --> 34:43.898
contemporary life.

34:43.900 --> 34:52.460
So mechanical solidarity does
exist in contemporary society as

34:52.456 --> 34:53.436
well.

34:53.440 --> 35:00.980
And he makes this reference to
finding a marital partner,

35:00.978 --> 35:08.918
whom we want to date with,
and whom we consider to marry.

35:08.920 --> 35:14.930
And occasionally we are--we try
to find somebody who is more

35:14.934 --> 35:19.294
similar than we are,
and people will say,

35:19.291 --> 35:22.611
"Well you look
like"--

35:22.610 --> 35:23.990
if you are
heterosexual--"like

35:23.990 --> 35:25.170
brothers and sisters".

35:25.170 --> 35:27.930
Or if you are gay,
"Well you look like

35:27.925 --> 35:30.285
brothers"
or "You look like

35:30.289 --> 35:31.209
sisters."

35:31.208 --> 35:31.928
Right?

35:31.929 --> 35:34.319
You look the same,
you look similar.

35:34.320 --> 35:38.000
And that can be--right?--a
consideration for a lasting

35:37.998 --> 35:38.968
partnership.

35:38.969 --> 35:43.279
I'm trying to find somebody who
likes the same stuff what I

35:43.280 --> 35:44.840
like, who is like me.

35:44.840 --> 35:45.510
Right?

35:45.510 --> 35:48.170
But it can be the opposite as
well.

35:48.172 --> 35:48.802
Right?

35:48.800 --> 35:52.640
You may be looking for a
person--you may follow the logic

35:52.635 --> 35:56.195
of organic solidarity,
right?--you may be looking for

35:56.195 --> 35:58.385
a person who will complement
you.

35:58.387 --> 35:59.207
Right?

35:59.210 --> 36:04.780
I'm bad in keeping the books,
and therefore what I am trying

36:04.778 --> 36:09.878
to look for is somebody who will
balance the checkbook.

36:09.876 --> 36:10.816
Right?

36:10.820 --> 36:16.210
So occasionally looking for a
partner, we are looking for

36:16.208 --> 36:19.478
somebody who will complement us.

36:19.480 --> 36:22.090
Now that
describes--right?--modern

36:22.092 --> 36:26.212
society, with a higher level of
division of labor.

36:26.210 --> 36:31.330
Division of labor,
he said, can bring us together,

36:31.329 --> 36:36.759
much like the bodily organism,
that we are performing

36:36.762 --> 36:40.422
different functions in society.

36:40.420 --> 36:45.260
We complement each other--we
need each other--on the basis of

36:45.257 --> 36:49.127
our differences,
rather than our similarities.

36:49.130 --> 36:54.540
And, in fact,
the contractual law expresses

36:54.539 --> 37:00.079
the spirit of organic solidarity
as such.

37:00.079 --> 37:05.589
Well Durkheim will show us that
there is, in fact,

37:05.588 --> 37:11.428
a lot of trouble in the
transition from mechanical to

37:11.434 --> 37:17.084
organic solidarity;
and this is what he will call

37:17.076 --> 37:17.916
anomie.

37:17.920 --> 37:21.460
In the transition from
mechanical to organic

37:21.458 --> 37:24.058
solidarity,
moving from a traditional

37:24.063 --> 37:28.153
society to a modern society,
our value system breaks down,

37:28.152 --> 37:31.872
we find ourselves in the
situation of anomie.

37:31.869 --> 37:36.609
But this is a topic I will be
talking about Thursday.

37:36.610 --> 37:38.860
Thank you very much.

37:38.860 --> 37:44.000