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 <> 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