You are on page 1of 15

Discuss Emile Durkheims analysis of suicide and its effects on human

society. (1999)

Durkheim wrote extensively on the suicide. Critically examine his views about
suicide. (2003)

mile Durkheim quotes (showing 1-5 of 5)

Melancholy suide. --This is connected with a general state of extreme depression and
exaggerated sadness, causing the patient no longer to realize sanely the bonds which
connect him with people and things about him. Pleasures no longer attract;
mile Durkheim, Suicide: A Study in Sociology

tags: connections , depression , melancholy , people , sanity , suicide

7 people liked it

When mores are sufficient, laws are unnecessary; when mores are insufficient, laws are
unenforceable.
mile Durkheim

tags: law , rule

5 people liked it

Socialism is not a science, a sociology in miniature: it is a cry of pain.


mile Durkheim

tags: socialism

3 people liked it

Man cannot become attached to higher aims and submit to a rule if he sees nothing
above him to which he belongs. To free himself from all social pressure is to abandon
himself and demoralize him.
mile Durkheim

tags: anomie , freedom

2 people liked it

...Solidarity is, literally something which the society possesses.


mile Durkheim

like

like

like

like

Durkheim defined suicide as "all cases of death resulting directly or indirectly from a
positive or

negative act of the victim himself, which he knows will produce this result."
Emile Durkheim(1858-1917) is considered one of the "fathers" of sociology because of his effort to
establish sociology as a discipline distinct from philosophy and psychology. This effort is evident in the two
main themes that permeate Durkheim's work: the priority of the social over the individual and the idea that
society can be studied scientifically. Durkheim's concept of social facts, in particular, differentiates sociology
from philosophy and psychology.Social facts are the social structures and cultural norms and values that are
external to, and coercive over, individuals. Social facts are not attached to any particular individual; nor are
they reducible to individual consciousness. Thus, social facts can be studied empirically. According to
Durkheim, two different types of social facts exist: material and immaterial. Durkheim was most interested
in studying the latter, particularly morality, collective conscience, collective representation, and social
currents.
Suicide
Durkheim's goal to differentiate sociology from psychology is perhaps best seen in this work on how social
facts can be used to explain suicide rates. This work is also important because of the historical comparative
method that Durkheim uses to show that that suicide rates vary across societies and over time. According to
Durkheim, suicide cannot simply be explained by individual psychological problems-otherwise suicide rates
would be static. Durkheim argues that two social facts, in particular, influence suicide rates: integration, or
the strength of attachment people feel to society, and regulation, or the degree of external constraint on
people. Durkheim distinguishes between four types of suicide that correlate to these two social facts.
Egoistic suicide is a result of a lack of integration; altruistic suicide is a result of too much integration;
anomic suicide is a result of too little regulation; and fatalistic suicide is a result of too much regulation.

Durkheim's Suicide was one of the groundbreaking works in sociology. He wrote it at the end of the 19 th century
with the intention of demonstrating the analytical method of sociology. However, beyond this, most of his
findings about suicide still stand firm.
While 'Suicide' is not a counselling book, there are many points (both in theory and in method) that may be
interesting for students of counselling and counsellors.
Although Durkheim wrote 'Suicide' to demonstrate the use of sociological methods on a concrete social
problem, many of his findings still stand. He asserted that suicide was a social phenomenon, the primary
causes of suicide were social: the collapse of social relationships or (just the opposite) the overpowering of
social relationships. The three main trends in suicide research (suicide and other deviant behaviours, status
integration and role-conflicts, the ways in which social effects manifest themselves in psychological processes)
derive from Durkheim's study.

Suicide (French: Le Suicide) was one of the groundbreaking books in the


field of sociology. Written by French sociologist mile Durkheim and
published in 1897 it was a case study (some argue that it is not a case
study, and that this is what makes it unique among other scholarly work on
the same subject) of suicide.

Findings
Durkheim explores the differing suicide rates among Protestants and Catholics, arguing that
stronger social control among Catholics results in lower suicide rates. According to Durkheim, Catholic
society has normal levels of integration while Protestant society has low levels. There are at least two
problems with this interpretation. First, Durkheim took most of his data from earlier researchers,
notably Adolph Wagner and Henry Morselli,[1] who were much more careful in generalizing from their own
data. Second, later researchers found that the Protestant-Catholic differences in suicide seemed to be
limited to German-speaking Europe and thus may always have been the spurious reflection of other
factors.[2] Despite its limitations, Durkheim's work on suicide has influenced proponents ofcontrol theory,
and is often mentioned as a classic sociological study.
Durkheim established that:

Suicide rates are higher in men than women (although married women who remained childless
for a number of years ended up with a high suicide rate)

Suicide rates are higher for those who are single than those who are married

Suicide rates are higher for people without children than people with children

Suicide rates are higher among Protestants than Catholics and Jews

Suicide rates are higher among soldiers than civilians

Suicide rates are higher in times of peace than in times of war (the suicide rate in France fell after
the coup d'etat of Louis Bonaparte, for example. War also reduced the suicide rate, after war broke
out in 1866 between Austria and Italy, the suicide rate fell by 14% in both countries.)

Suicide rates are higher in Scandinavian countries

the higher the education level, the more likely it was that an individual would commit suicide,
however Durkheim established that there is more correlation between an individual's religion and
suicide rate than an individual's education level; Jewish people were generally highly educated but
had a low suicide rate.

[edit]Types

of suicide

Durkheim defines suicide as follows:

...the term suicide is applied to all cases of death resulting directly or indirectly from a positive or negative
act of the victim himself, which he knows will produce this result.
Durkheim, 1897[3]
He also distinguished between four subtypes of suicide:

Egoistic suicide reflects a prolonged sense of not belonging, of not being integrated in a
community, an experience, of not having a tether, an absence that can give rise to meaninglessness,
apathy, melancholy, and depression.[4] It is the result of a weakening of the bonds that normally
integrate individuals into the collectivity: in other words a breakdown or decrease of social integration.
Durkheim refers to this type of suicide as the result of "excessive individuation", meaning that the
individual becomes increasingly detached from other members of his community. Those individuals
who were not sufficiently bound to social groups (and therefore well-defined values, traditions, norms,
and goals) were left with little social support or guidance, and therefore tended to commit suicide on
an increased basis. An example Durkheim discovered was that of unmarried people, particularly
males, who, with less to bind and connect them to stable social norms and goals, committed suicide
at higher rates than married people.[5]

Altruistic suicide: is characterized by a sense of being overwhelmed by a group's goals and


beliefs. [6] It occurs in societies with high integration, where individual needs are seen as less
important than the society's needs as a whole. They thus occur on the opposite integration scale as
egoistic suicide.[5] As individual interest would not be considered important, Durkheim stated that in
an altruistic society there would be little reason for people to commit suicide. He stated one
exception, namely when the individual is expected to kill themselves on behalf of society a primary
example being the soldier in military service.

Anomic suicide: reflects an individual's moral confusion and lack of social direction, which is
related to dramatic social and economic upheaval. [7] It is the product of moral deregulation and a lack
of definition of legitimate aspirations through a restraining social ethic, which could impose meaning
and order on the individual conscience. This is symptomatic of a failure of economic development
and division of labour to produce Durkheim's organic solidarity. People do not know where they fit in
within their societies. Durkheim explains that this is a state of moral disorder where man does not
know the limits on his desires, and is constantly in a state of disappointment. This can occur when
man goes through extreme changes in wealth; while this includes economic ruin, it can also include
windfall gains - in both cases, previous expectations from life are brushed aside and new
expectations are needed before he can judge his new situation in relation to the new limits.

Fatalistic suicide: the opposite of anomic suicide, when a person is excessively regulated, when
their futures are pitilessly blocked and passions violently choked by oppressive discipline. [8] It occurs
in overly oppressive societies, causing people to prefer to die than to carry on living within their
society. This is an extremely rare reason for people to take their own lives, but a good example would
be within a prison; people prefer to die than live in a prison with constant abuse and excessive
regulation that prohibits them from pursuing their desires.

These four types of suicide are based on the degrees of imbalance of two social forces: social integration
and moral regulation.[5] Durkheim noted the effects of various crises on social aggregates war, for
example, leading to an increase in altruism, economic boom or disaster contributing to anomie.[9]
[edit]Criticism
Durkheim's study of suicide has been criticized as an example of the logical error termed the ecological
fallacy.[10][11] Indeed, Durkheim's conclusions about individual behaviour (e.g. suicide) are based
on aggregate statistics (the suicide rate among Protestants and Catholics). This type of inference,
explaining micro events in terms of macro properties, is often misleading, as is shown by examples
of Simpson's paradox.[12]
However, diverging views have contested whether Durkheim's work really contained an ecological fallacy.
Van Poppel and Day (1996) have advanced that differences in suicide rates between Catholics and
Protestants were explicable entirely in terms of how deaths were categorized between the two social
groups. For instance, while "sudden deaths" or "deaths from ill-defined or unspecified cause" would often
be recorded as suicides among Protestants, this would not be the case for Catholics. Hence Durkheim
would have committed an empirical rather than logical error.[13] Some, such as Inkeles (1959),[14] Johnson
(1965)[15] and Gibbs (1968),[16] have claimed that Durkheim's only intent was to explain
suicide sociologically within a holistic perspective, emphasizing that "he intended his theory to explain
variation among social environments in the incidence of suicide, not the suicides of particular
individuals."[17]
More recent authors such as Berk (2006) have also questioned the micro-macro relations underlying
Durkheim's work. For instance, Berk notices that
Durkheim speaks of a "collective current" that reflects the collective inclination flowing down the channels
of social organization. The intensity of the current determines the volume of suicides (...) Introducing
psychological [i.e. individual] variables such as depression, [which could be seen as] an independent
[non-social] cause of suicide, overlooks Durkheim's conception that these variables are the ones most
likely to be effected by the larger social forces and without these forces suicide may not occur within such
individuals.[18]
Jennifer M. Lehmann critiques Durkheim's major works such as Suicide from a feminist, Structuralist
Marxist, multiculturalist perspective, and a Deconstructionist method, in Deconstructing
Durkheim(Routledge 1993); Durkheim and Women (University of Nebraska Press 1994); and chapters
and articles in Sociological Theory (1990); Current Perspectives in Sociological Theory (1991); American
Sociological Review (1995); and American Journal of Sociological Theory (1995).
[edit]See

also

Four Types of Suicide


The manner in which social integration and regulation work can be better seen by
examining the four fold classification of suicides that Durkheim developed. Durkheim
ends his discussion of the organic-psychic and physical environmental factors by

concluding that they cannot explain "each social group[s] ... specific tendency to
suicide." (Suicide, p. 145). By eliminating other explanations, Durkheim claims that
these tendencies must depend on social causes and must be collective phenomena. The
key to each type is a social factor, with the degrees of integration and regulation into
society being either too high or too low. (The following discussion is drawn from
Ritzer, pp. 90 ff.).
1. Egoistic Suicide. This is the type of suicide that occurs where the degree of social
integration is low, and there is a sense of meaningless among individuals. In
traditional societies, with mechanical solidarity, this is not likely to be the cause of
suicide. There the strong collective consciousness gives people a broad sense of
meaning to their lives. Within modern society, the weaker collective consciousness
means that people may not see the same meaning in their lives, and unrestrained
pursuit of individual interests may lead to strong dissatisfaction. One of the results of
this can be suicide. Individuals who are strongly integrated into a family structure, a
religious group, or some other type of integrative group are less likely to encounter
these problems, and that explains the lower suicide rates among them.
The factors leading to egoistic suicide can be social currents such as depression and
disillusionment. For Durkheim, these are social forces or social facts, even though it is
the depressed or melancholy individual who takes his or her life voluntarily. "Actors
are never free of the force of the collectivity: 'However individualized a man may be,
there is always something collective remaining the very depression and melancholy
resulting from this same exaggerated individualism.'" Also, on p. 214 of Suicide,
Durkheim says "Thence are formed currents of depression and disillusionment
emanating from no particular individual but expressing society's state of
disillusionment." Durkheim notes that "the bond attaching man to life relaxes because
that attaching him to society is itself slack. ... The individual yields to the slightest
shock of circumstance because the state of society has made him a ready prey to
suicide." (Suicide, pp. 214-215).
2. Altruistic Suicide. This is the type of suicide that occurs when integration is too
great, the collective consciousness too strong, and the "individual is forced into
committing suicide." (Ritzer, p. 91). Integration may not be the direct cause of suicide
here, but the social currents that go along with this very high degree of integration can
lead to this. The followers of Jim Jones of the Peoples Temple or the members of the
Solar Temple are an example of this, as are ritual suicides in Japan. Ritzer notes that

some may "feel it is their duty" to commit suicide. (p. 91). Examples in primitive
society cited by Durkheim are suicides of those who are old and sick, suicides of
women following the death of their husband, and suicides of followers after the death
of a chief. According to Durkheim this type of suicide may actually "springs from
hope, for it depends on the belief in beautiful perspectives beyond this life."
3. Anomic Suicide. Anomie or anomy come from the Greek meaning
lawlessness. Nomos means usage, custom, or law and nemein means to distribute.
Anomy thus is social instability resulting from breakdown of standards and values.
(Webster's Dictionary).
This is a type of suicide related to too low a degree of regulation, or external
constraint on people. As with the anomic division of labour, this can occur when the
normal form of the division of labour is disrupted, and "the collectivity is temporarily
incapable of exercising its authority over individuals." (Ritzer, p. 92). This can occur
either during periods associated with economic depression (stock market crash of the
1930s) or over-rapid economic expansion. New situations with few norms, the
regulative effect of structures is weakened, and the individual may feel rootless. In
this situation, an individual may be subject to anomic social currents. People that are
freed from constraints become "slaves to their passions, and as a result, according to
Durkheim's view, commit a wide range of destructive acts, including killing
themselves in greater numbers than they ordinarily would." (Ritzer, p., 92). In addition
to economic anomie, Durkheim also spends time examining domestic anomie. For
example, suicides of family members may occur after the death of a husband or wife.
4. Fatalistic Suicide. When regulation is too strong, Durkheim considers the
possibility that "persons with futures pitilessly blocked and passions violently choked
by oppressive discipline" may see no way out. The individual sees no possible manner
in which their lives can be improved, and when in a state of melancholy, may be
subject to social currents of fatalistic suicide.
Summary. Durkheim's analysis of suicide shows the manner in which the social as
opposed to the psychological and biological can be emphasized, and how it results in
some useful ways of analyzing the actions of individuals. Suicide rates as expressions
of social currents are social facts that affect societies and individuals within those
societies. The study of psychology is still useful in attempting to determine individual
motives and the manner in which the specific circumstances can lead to an individual

deciding to voluntarily end their life. But an analysis of these circumstances should be
set within the context of the social currents to which that individual is subject.
The method of analysis of Durkheim should prove useful even today. In terms of
suicide, the social causes are now well recognized, and any analysis of suicide would
have to include these. Some combination of egoistic, anomic, and fatalistic types of
suicide may help explain and understand this phenomenon. More generally, the
method of Suicide is exemplary in providing researchers with a means of
understanding the social factors that are associated with particular phenomena.
Durkheim examines patterns on the data in an attempt to determine how social factors
can play a role in explaining these phenomena. This might be applied to
sociobiological arguments today. The trends themselves are not the cause, but
indicative of a cause, a social explanation has to be found.
C. Conclusions about Durkheim
1. Contributions
a. Social Facts and Social Aspects. These are real things that do affect people. He
had a strong structural view of society, and the manner in which each of us is
influenced by these social facts and how we must fit into these. Durkheim attempted
to see a role for the social as distinguished from the economic, psychological and
biological. This can be seen in his view of the social influences on suicide rates, where
he takes a wide variety of factors and considers their influence on the tendency or
aptitude for suicide. The effect of each of these factors is not a simple connection
between the factor and the tendency to suicide, but must be mediated by social factors.
In particular, the social factors that he identified were the degree of integration and the
degree of regulation. For modern theories of sociobiology, and the influence of
genetics, Durkheim's approach could prove a useful counter.
b. Division of Labour and forms of solidarity. Durkheim again shows how the
division of labour is set within a social context, so that economic relationships are
governed by social conventions that may not always be apparent. Durkheim's view
that the division of labour does not result in a disintegration of society, but changes
the form of social solidarity provides a useful way of examining modern society.

The last few pages of Giddens' discussion of Durkheim examines individuality and
individual freedom within an overall structure (Giddens, pp. 115-118). Durkheim
notes that individualism is a product of long historical developments within western
society, with the French Revolution giving a "decisive impetus to the growth of moral
individualism." (Giddens, p. 116). Part of this view is the sanctity of the individual,
the worth of the human individual, individual rights and the encouragement of
individual action and initiative. But Durkheim notes that these themselves are social
facts in the sense that these ideas are social products, created by society. Durkheim
further argues that they are not the product of egoism, that is, self-interest as the basic
motivation for human action. While the development of individualism will promote
self-interest and egoism, this is not the source of individualism, and an unchecked
development of egoism would destroy society. This is not what happens though,
except perhaps under exceptional circumstances.
What Durkheim argues is that freedom is not to be identified with liberation from all
restraints, this results in anomie (Giddens, p. 117). Rather, freedom exists in being
"master of oneself" by "putting oneself under the wing of society." That is, freedom is
achieved within a set of moral rules, and discipline within this set of rules is an
essential aspect of freedom. The notion of rights and responsibilities may be a means
of tying these together.
c. Sociological Approaches. Many of common approaches to sociology derive from
Durkheim. The method of attempting to determine social facts and their influence,
along with concepts such as norms, values, socialization, institutions, etc. could be
considered to come at least partly from Durkheim.
2. Problems
At the same time as Durkheim made a number of important contributions to
sociology, there are a number of problems with his analysis. Some of these are as
follows.
a. Action. As noted above, Durkheim has a particular view of human freedom and this
may be regarded as too limited. Or even if this approach is adopted, it is not clear
what is the basis for individual human motivation and action. Durkheim's view is a
very strong structural view. Society and social facts more or less determine our
behaviour, and we have little option but to accept those. He favours such an approach,

and considers deviations from this as abnormal. This could allow his approach to be
used to identify any behaviour that is not part of the common morality as abnormal
and perhaps deviant, something that has to be corrected or eliminated. For example,
immigrants, youth culture, etc.
While there are many aspects of a common morality in our society, there are also
many opportunities for individuals acting in a variety of ways in similar situations.
Durkheim might recognize this as possible, but he seems to have little to say
concerning the nature of human motivation. He is too concerned with the larger
structural issues. Durkheim and Marx are similar in this sense, they both have a very
strong structural view, with limited possibility for human action, or little theory of
human action. Weber's model of action or some of the more recent approaches such as
symbolic interaction would prove more useful here.
b. Consensus, Solidarity and Common Consciousness. While Durkheim makes a
useful contribution in presenting ideas concerning the source of societal solidarity, this
often appears to be his only concern. One difficulty with Durkheim and the structural
functional approach is that the latter almost completely ignore conflict and power
differences. Durkheim may have constructed his approach in part to negate the
Marxian or conflict approach to the study of society. Durkheim treats the anomic and
forced forms of the division of labour as unusual, and devotes little time to their
analysis.
There are, however, several key issues that are highly problematic in Durkheim's approach.
Firstly, in correspondence with the philosophy of his time, he asserted that humans have infinite desires that
are constrained by social norms. Hence his conclusion, for example, that marriage protects against suicide as it
constrains sexual desire. The theoretical background, though Durkheim did not state it, is the psycho-biologist
explanation.
Secondly, Durkheim presented his findings in ideal types, which clearly do not exist in a concrete case (except
for the exceptions) but in combinations with other ideal types. This leads to the question of the existence of
mixed types and the characteristics of these.
Thirdly, Durkheim, on correspondence with the method of sociology, concentrated on correlations and
measurable phenomena. As a result, causality was a problem (as correlations do not mean causality) and so
were the deep, invisible relationships (the essence) among phenomena. Durkheim, however, was aware of the

problem and the reader will be easily identify the points at which Durkheim went beyond the measurable,
countable phenomena. This, among other factors, explains the huge, enduring influence of this book.
Let us now turn to Durkheim's analysis of suicide.
He first dealt with the extra-social effects: psychology, cosmic effects and imitation.
Suicide and madness
Psychiatrists at the time claimed that all suicide was related to mental illness. They classified four types of
suicide:
Maniac suicide: caused by hallucinations, delirium. The patient kills himself to escape from such imagined
danger, shame or accept some external order. The intention to commit suicide appears suddenly and if the
attempt fails, he will not repeat the attempt (or the cause is different).
Melancholic suicide: related to extreme depression. The patient cannot determine his real relationship to others
and the environment. The intention to commit suicide is very stabile. Such patients prepare the means of their
death with great patience and repeat the attempt until success.
Nightmare suicide: caused by death wish: the patient wants to kill himself without any real cause. According to
the psychiatrists of the era it was similar to kleptomania, serial murder and arson. They also called this form of
suicide anxiety suicide. As soon as the patient decides to give up the struggle against death wish, his anxiety
goes.
Automatic or impulsive suicide: similar to the nightmare suicide as there is no reason for it, but there is no
struggle (hence it is impulsive).
Durkheim then investigated these types on the basis of statistical evidence. He found four pieces of evidence
that clearly disproved the statistical relationship between suicide and mental illness.
1.

He found that women were more likely to be mentally ill: 54-55 women for 46-45 men, while 7582% of suicides were committed by men.

2.

Mental illness was higher among Jews than among Catholics or Protestants, while the suicide rate
was much lower.

3.

The suicide rate increased with age, while mental illness declined after 30-35 years of age.

4.

While high population of mental illness coincided with a higher number of suicides, there was no
correlation between the two, because the growth in suicide was not systematic with the growth of mental
illnesses.

Suicide and normal psychological conditions, heritance


Durkheim said that there was no systematic information on these causes, but anecdotal evidence suggested
the existence of such causes. He cited a few cases in which the members of a family, at various times, killed
themselves using the same method. But he also cited examples, where in a similar phenomenon could not be
explained by heritage. For example in 1772 fifteen war casualties hanged themselves on the same hook in an
inn. Once the hook was removed, there was no more suicide. In a military base in Boulogne a soldier shot
himself in a guard hut. A few days later several more soldiers followed the example. Once the hut was burned
down, the suicides stopped.
However, Durkheim stated, if heritage was a factor, it should have affected both sexes, but it was not the case.
Also age should not then play a role in the factor of heritage, but he found that suicide was rare among children
and was the highest among old.
Suicide and cosmic factors
Firstly, Durkheim demonstrated that there was no relationship between geography and suicide. While in the
19th century suicide was lowest in the south and north of Europe, it changed during history. Or, for example,
while before 1870 suicide was the highest in North Italy, then Central Italy and then the South, by the end of the
century it reversed to the opposite.
Secondly, it was a common wisdom that winter and autumn could cause suicide. But in fact 60% of suicides
happened in the warm months and only 40% in the rest of the year. Moreover, there was no systematic
relationship between temperature or sunshine (more suicide was committed at daytime than in the night, but
there was no correlation between the length of day and the number of suicides). In terms of months, most
suicide in France and Prussia were committed between April and July, but again temperature and number of
suicide did not correlate. Furthermore, the suicide rate was higher in the middle of Europe (where it is cold in
the winter and warm in the summer), while in the South the suicide rate was low (where the temperature is
relatively stable).
Imitation
Durkheim stated that there was no doubt in that suicide could spread like an epidemic. However, if suicide was
an epidemic, it should have been reflected geographically, but this was not the case.
After disproving the above causes, Durkheim turns to the social causes.
Within this category, Durkheim created the following ideal types of suicide
Egoist suicide

First Durkheim examined the role of religion. In Catholic countries suicide was low, in Protestant countries it
was high. Among Jews (while the Jewish belief does not forbid suicide), the suicide rate was even lower,
though it started to increase around 1870. Considering that most Jews lived in towns and had white-collar jobs
(both cases suggest a higher suicide rate), Durkheim concluded, Jewish religion had to be an important factor.
In addition, he found that in cases when any of these religions were in minority in a particular geographic area,
the suicide rate was even lower. Durkheim argued that the greater freedom given in Protestantism had to be
related to the higher suicide rate, but only in relationship with the type of Protestant church. In England, the
suicide rate was only about the fifth of the German protestant states, but, argues Durkheim, the Church of
England (and the English society) was much more integrated and regulated than in Germany. In addition, the
ratio between believers and priests was the highest in England (908), while in Germany 1600. In Catholic areas
the ratio between believers and priests was even lower: in Italy 267, in Belgium 1050. Furthermore, among
Protestants the value of learning was much higher than among Catholics (and among learned people suicide
was more common). The fact that among Jewish communities the suicide rate was lower while education was
higher, however, contradicted the proposition. Durkheim argued that higher education causes suicide not by
itself, but only if it represents the shaking of traditional values. Consequently, Protestants did not commit more
suicide because they believe in God or the eternity of soul less than Catholics, but because the cohesion of the
Protestant Church was weaker.
Secondly, Durkheim examined the role of marriage. Figures showed that married men committed more suicide
than bachelors. However, a proper analysis (exclusion of men unlikely to get married - children) showed that
suicide is higher among bachelors than among married men. But if the fact that the suicide rate increased with
age and bachelors were younger than married men accounted for, Durkheim argued, being a bachelor
increased the likelihood of suicide by 160% (or marriage reduced it by 50%).
Similar problems emerged about widows. Among one million 65 years old widows 628 committed suicide, while
among one million 65 years old men only 461. However, the fact was that this age consisted almost exclusively
married men (about 90%), therefore, the sample was very good. Durkheim's analysis showed that although
widows were more likely to kill themselves than married people, they were less likely to do so than bachelors or
maidens. Again Durkheim argued that although the family is factor behind the figures, but a simple conclusion
would have been problematic. Firstly, because the number of marriages barely changed in his period, while
suicide tripled, secondly, because it was clearly influenced by age. Importantly, Durkheim points out, that not
simply marriage was the factor, but marriage with children. If there were children in the marriage, the suicide
rate was lower than in the infertile families. Therefore, not marriage, but the family as a social unit (with its
cohesion) is the factor.
Thirdly, Durkheim investigated the role of crises and wars. He demonstrated that in social crises (e.g.
revolutions) and wars the number of suicide dropped.

All in all, the more religious a society was the less likely it was to have high suicide rate, the stronger the family
was in a society the less likely it was to have high suicide rate, the more integrated a society was, the less likely
it was to have high suicide rate.
Altruist suicide
Durkheim argued that less 'civilised' societies also knew suicide and cited examples (Inuit, native Americans,
Germans in the Roman era, Indians, etc.). He differentiated between three groups of people committing suicide
in these societies: 1) old or ill people; 2) Women after their husband's death; 3) suicide of servants after the
leader's death. In all these cases people did not choose suicide, he argued, but it was their obligation. Thus,
these suicides happened because of the higher superiority of the values and interests of the community
compared to the values and interests of the members of the community.
Then Durkheim turned to the armed forces. He pointed out that the suicide rate was very high in military service
and he considered it to be a surprising result. It was surprising, because military (similarly to religions and
cohesive societies) there was a strong solidarity and the individuals were physically fitter than the rest of the
society. Furthermore, the cause of the suicide could not be attributed to the hatred towards the service or
inability to adjust to the routines of the military service, because the suicide rate was proportionately increased
with the length of service. Also, suicide rates among NCOs and officers were much higher than among privates.
Furthermore, suicide was higher in elite units than in normal units. Finally, the weaker the military spirit was in a
unit the lower the suicide rate was. Thus, Durkheim argued, NCOs and officers had to give up so much of their
individuality to adjust to the requirement of the service that made them vulnerable to suicide.
Anomic suicide
Durkheim classified social suicide in this category.
Statistics showed that during economic crises (recessions) suicide rate increased. However, fast growth
periods also correlated with high suicide rates. Therefore, Durkheim concluded, it was not poverty that created
suicide. Essentially, Durkheim argued, these periods weakened social norms or at least made them uncertain
and this reduced the cohesion of the society, which in turn, led to higher suicide rates. Durkheim also stated
that social changes could create such a situation. In his time there was a strong correlation between divorce
and suicide: divorcees were three times as likely to commit suicide than married people.
From all these Durkheim concluded: there were different types of suicides and the causes of committing suicide
could contradict to each other.

Sociology as a Discipline and Social Facts


Emile Durkheim(1858-1917) is considered one of the "fathers" of sociology because of his effort to
establish sociology as a discipline distinct from philosophy and psychology. This effort is evident in the
two main themes that permeate Durkheim's work: the priority of the social over the individual and the
idea that society can be studied scientifically. Durkheim's concept of social facts, in particular,
differentiates sociology from philosophy and psychology.Social facts are the social structures and
cultural norms and values that are external to, and coercive over, individuals. Social facts are not
attached to any particular individual; nor are they reducible to individual consciousness. Thus, social
facts can be studied empirically. According to Durkheim, two different types of social facts exist:
material and immaterial. Durkheim was most interested in studying the latter, particularly morality,
collective conscience, collective representation, and social currents.
The Division of Labor
In this work Durkheim discusses how modern society is held together by a division of labor that makes
individuals dependent upon one another because they specialize in different types of work. Durkheim is
particularly concerned about how the division of labor changes the way that individuals feel they are
part of society as a whole. Societies with little division of labor (i.e., where people are self-sufficient)
are unified by mechanical solidarity; all people engage in similar tasks and thus have similar
responsibilities, which builds a strong collective conscience. Modern society, however, is held together
by organic solidarity (the differences between people), which weakens collective conscience. Durkheim
studied these different types of solidarity through laws. A society with mechanical solidarity is
characterized by repressive law, while a society with organic solidarity is characterized by restitutive
law.
Suicide
Durkheim's goal to differentiate sociology from psychology is perhaps best seen in this work on how
social facts can be used to explain suicide rates. This work is also important because of the historical
comparative method that Durkheim uses to show that that suicide rates vary across societies and over
time. According to Durkheim, suicide cannot simply be explained by individual psychological problemsotherwise suicide rates would be static. Durkheim argues that two social facts, in particular, influence
suicide rates: integration, or the strength of attachment people feel to society, and regulation, or the
degree of external constraint on people. Durkheim distinguishes between four types of suicide that
correlate to these two social facts. Egoistic suicide is a result of a lack of integration; altruistic suicide
is a result of too much integration; anomic suicide is a result of too little regulation; and fatalistic
suicide is a result of too much regulation.
Elementary Forms of Religious Life
This is perhaps Durkheim's most complex work, as he attempts to provide both a sociology of religion
and a theory of knowledge. In this work, Durkheim studies primitive society to demonstrate that an
enduring quality of all religions, even the most modern, is the differentiation between the sacred and
the profane. The sacred is created through rituals, and what is deemed sacred is what morally binds
individuals to society. This moral bond then becomes, according to Durkheim, a cognitive bond that
shapes the categories we use to understand the social world.
The development of religion is not simply based on the differentiation between the sacred and the
profane, but also on religious beliefs, rituals, and the church. The latter two conditions are particularly
important to Durkheim because they connect the individual to the social; individuals learn about the
sacred and religious beliefs through participating in rituals and the church. The most primitive form of
religion is totemism, which is connected to the least complex form of social organization, the clan. The
totem is the actual representation of the clan-it is the material representation of the nonmaterial,
collective morality of the clan.
Totemism is important to Durkheim's theory of knowledge in that it is one of his categories of
understanding: classification. Other categories of understanding include time, space, force, causality,
and totality. These six categories may be abstract concepts, but they are all derived from social
experiences, particularly rituals. Durkheim acknowledges that it is possible for moral and cognitive

You might also like