Durkheim's Social Facts

Durkheim

Social Facts

• One idea of Durkheim is that society exists as a separate entity over and above its members
• A system of external 'social facts' shaping their behaviour to serve society's needs
• These facts can be measured objectively to show patterns of behaviour
• He did this in his study of suicide (Crime and Deviance link) = cause of effect.
• In his theory of suicide, he explored the external forces of:

1. Moral regulation
2. Social integration

• The more integrated a person was in society, the less likely they were to commit suicide
• He measured this using suicide statistics in different European countries and compared the rate with how integrated they were based on their religion, family status (married, single etc)

Social Change

• He argued that the rapid social change that he saw during the Industrial Revolution from a simple society to one with a complex division of labour
• In a simple society, there was a high collective conscience. Institutions such as religion reinforced this
• This social change weakens the bonds between individuals and weakens social solidarity. This means there is a risk of anomie (normlessness)

The establishment and maintenance of social order – value consensus and social integration

• Durkheim said because people are selfish, society would fall into chaos and disorder unless we all shared the same values
• Durkheim therefore placed great importance on the role of social institutions, such as the family and the education system, in socialising people into what he called a value consensus or collective conscience
• This can build social solidarity and social cohesion and regulates individual behaviour

A02 Synoptic links:

• Families and Education system = provide socialisation Durkheim's functions of Education:

1. The education system instils social solidarity

2. Teaches social rules and how to abide by them

3. Teaches specialist skills

A03 Evaluation:

1. Overemphasis on consensus and ignores conflict, such as class and gender

2. Society is diverse – no longer shared values + collective conscience

3. Interpretivists would disagree

Merton

The internal critique

• Merton criticises Parsons' concept of universal functionalism – the idea that everything in society performs a positive function
• He argues that in complex modern societies, this is doubtful...
• He argues that many things are actually dysfunctional
• E.g. various religions + faiths – this may divide rather than unite society: Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland
• His overall point is that we cannot just simply assume that society is always a smooth-running, well-integrated system

Merton's manifest and latent functions

Merton suggested there were manifest functions of an institution, but also latent functions alongside them

• Manifest functions – the positive functions 'intended and recognised by participants in the system'
• Latent functions – are neither 'intended nor recognised'

Indispensability

• This idea states that certain institutions or social arrangements are indispensable to society = that society cannot operate without them
• For example, Davis and Moore (1967) claim that religion 'plays a unique and indispensable part in human society'
• Merton questions this assumption = he argues that a functional prerequisite may be met by a range of alternative institutions
• To replace the idea of indispensability, Merton suggests the concept of functional alternatives/equivalents E.g. Parsons assumes that primary socialisation is best performed by the Nuclear Family – but perhaps lone-parent families or other family types do it JUST as well or BETTER!

A02 Synoptic links:

• NHS can be dysfunctional = spreads diseases
• Families can socialise children poorly…
• Religion can divide people…
• Families – lone parents can be just as effective as the nuclear family

A03 Evaluation:

Merton, Durkheim and Parsons can all be criticised (pg.373-374):

1. Social action theorists see Parsons as too deterministic – he sees individuals as simple passive products of the social system that are socialised into conformity and controlling their behaviour. He doesn't allow for individual choice and pays no regard to the actions, interpretations and meanings individuals give to situations, as the social actions theorists do.

2. Functionalism is a metanarrative or grand theory that tries to explain EVERYTHING from a SINGLE perspective. Postmodernists say that such metanarratives can no longer explain contemporary societies, where social life is chaotic and value diverse

3. Is there really a value consensus? Links to the point above. Surely in a dog-eat-dog society, there is actually more conflict and resentment rather than consensus and harmony.