Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Forces.
http://www.jstor.org
ABSTRACT
ThehistoricalrelationbetweenDurkheimian andMarxistsocialtheory,
as one of "mutualdisregard,"is indicated.A Marxistcriticismof thegeneral
orientationof Durkheim'ssociologyis thenoutlined,and this is followedby a
moredetailedcriticalexaminationof Durkheim'sconception of the stateandof
the moralregulationof society.Finally,the valueof Durkheim'ssociologyfor
understanding presentdaysocietiesis scrutinized.
II
III
Notes
1. A similarrelation, as Tiryakianhas shown, existed between Durkheimand Weber;but in
later sociologicaltheory there has been rathermore in the way of comparisonand confronta-
tion between Durkheimiansand Weberians.
2. In his review of Labriola'sEssayson theMaterialistConception of History(d).
3. The difference in the relation between Weberand Marxon one side, and Durkheim and
Marxon the other, is due in part no doubt to the very differentintellectualcontexts in which
the thought of Weberand Durkheim developed (and in particularthe influence of the phi-
losophy of history and historicalstudies in Germany), but also to the fact that whereas in
Germany there was already a powerful socialist movement, inspired by Marxism, in the
closing decades of the nineteenth century, French Marxismat that time was still relatively
weak and did not present a serious intellectualchallenge to the academicsocial sciences. So
far as Durkheim did feel obliged to comment more extensively on Marxismafter the mid-
1890s this was due to the wider diffusion of Marxistideas in France(particularlythrough the
writings of Sorel) and in the interest shown by some of his own most brilliantstudents in
Marxistsocialism. See Mauss who noted that one of their "SocialStudy" circleswas devoted
to a systematic reading and analysis of Capital;and also Lukes and Clarkwho give a fuller
accountof the socialistactivitiesof the younger Durkheimians.
4. Foran accountof these reviews see RaymondFirth(10).
5. The mannerof this regulationwas later worked out in greaterdetail in Durkheim'sdiscus-
sion of the role of the state on one side, and of occupationalassociations on the other. See
especially his preface to the 2nd edition of TheDivisionof Labour,and also Professional Ethics
andCivicMorals.
6. H. Bourgin,cited in Lukes (329).
7. Georges Friedmann(a, 17, 22). Friedmannrefers not only to that work, but also particu-
larly to Halbwachs(a).
8. However, more thorough researchin the future, emerging from the increasinginterest in
the historyof sociology,and the greaterattention paid to Marxistthought in that history,may
well uncoversome valuablecriticalstudies, in Marxistjournalsand elsewhere;for example, in
the journalof the Durkheimiansocialists,Notescritiques-sciences sociales,to which Lukesrefers
(328, n.34).
9. Kagan draws attention to the fact that Paul Barth in his survey of sociological theories,
ranged Marxand Durkheimtogether in the categoryof proponents of an "economicconcep-
tion of history"(Barth).
10. Hirst himself makes this point at the outset when he says that his study is not concerned
with Durkheim per se, but has as its object "to question and to challenge the dominant
conceptions of epistemology in sociology";and indeed the ultimateaim of his work, inspired
by Althusser'sversion of Marxism,is to demolish all non-Althusserianconceptionsof "scien-
tificity."
11. Paul Nizan (97) cited in Lewis Coser (169). There was an equally strong reactionfrom the
CatholicRight;Bougle (168)quotes the remarkof a Catholicsociologist, JeanIzoulet, that "the
obligationto teach the sociology of M. Durkheimin the two hundred ecoles normalesof France
is the most serious nationalperil which our country has known for a long time."
12. See the qualifiedargumentin this sense by Anthony Giddens (235-72).
13. As Firthrecognizes. He then goes on to attributethe emergence of an influentialMarxist
anthropologyto the fact that anthropologists,in the postwar period of nationalindependence
movements and decolonization,have been "confrontedwith societies in conditions of radical
change" (7).
14. A socialist-Sorel, for instance-would have said, with some justice, that this "creative
effervescence"and these "new ideas" had alreadyemerged in the form of the socialistmove-
ment.
15. Levi-Strausshimself has recognized affiliationbetween his own conception of structure
and that of Durkheimand the Durkheimians.(See Bottomoreand Nisbet 565-71.)
16. See the briefaccount of their work in Bottomoreand Nisbet (136-38, 590-94).
17. It would be preferable, perhaps, to refer always to "quasi-causality"or "quasi-causal
relations,"in order to recognize adequately the intervention of consciousness in all social
processes. Max Adler was one of the principal Marxist thinkers to examine carefully the
notion of "socialcausality"in this sense.
18. The lectureswere given in Bordeauxfrom 1890-1900,and again in Parisin 1904 and 1912.
The published text is taken froma manuscriptwrittenbetween 1898and 1900.
19. See the brief discussion of the contrastingviews of Durkheimand Marxon the division of
labour,in Aimard(218-29), and the more comprehensivestudy of theories of the division of
labour,in Bougle (98-161).
20. Even if Durkheimhad maintainedconsistently that a materialbasis of social life (the size
and density of population)had some kind of explanatorypriority,his view would still be open
to the criticismwhich Marx,in the introductionto the Grundrisse, specificallylevelled against
the method of politicaleconomy when he wrote: "It appears to be correctto begin with the
real and concrete . . ., therefore,e.g., in politicaleconomy, with the population,which is the
basis and the subject of the whole social act of production. Nevertheless this is shown, on
closer consideration,to be false. Populationis an abstraction,if I omit the classes, for exam-
ple, of which it consists. Those classes are an empty word if I do not know the elements on
which they are based.. . . Thereforeif I begin with population, then that would be a chaotic
conceptionof the whole. . . "
21. I have in mind particularlythe work of JurgenHabermasand Alain Touraine.
22. In this context it does not matterwhether the classes in question are conceived as bour-
geoisie and proletariat(Marx)or as a technocratic-bureaucraticruling group and various
subordinate, dependent groups (a conception to be found in some recent discussions of
"post-industrialsociety").
References
Adler, Max. 1913. Marxistische Probleme.Beitrtgezur TheoriedermaterialistischenGes-
chichtsauffassung undDialektik.Stuttgart:Dietz.
Aimard,Guy. 1962. Durkheimet la scienceeconomique. Paris:Presses Universitairesde
France.
Barth,Paul. 1897. Die Philosophieder Geschichteals Soziologie.3d ed. Leipzig: Reis-
land, 1922.
Bauer, Otto. 1907. Die Nationalitdtenfrage und die Sozialdemokratie.
2d ed. Vienna:
WienerVolksbuchhandlung,1924.
Bottomore,Tom. 1975. MarxistSociology.London:Macmillan.
Bottomore, Tom, and Robert Nisbet. 1978. A Historyof SociologicalAnalysis.New
York:BasicBooks.
Bougle, Celestin. a:1903"Theoriessur la division du travail."Reprintedin Qu'est-
ce-quela sociologie?Paris:Feix Alcan, 1907.
. b:1935.Bilande la sociologiefranfaisecontemporaine.Paris:Felix Alcan.
Clark,TerryN. 1968. "The Structureand Functionsof a ResearchInstitute:L'Ann6e
Sociologique." ArchivesEuropeennes de SociologieIX(1):72-91.
Coser, Lewis. 1971. Mastersof SociologicalThought. New York: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich.
Durkheim, Emile. a:1892. Quid SecundatusPoliticaeScientiaeInstituendaeContulerit.
Latin thesis on Montesquieu. French translations, 1937 and 1953. English
translation in Montesquieuand Rousseau:Forerunnersof Sociology.Ann Arbor:
University of MichiganPress, 1960.
. b:1893. The Divisionof Labourin Society.2d ed., 1902. English translation,
New York:Macmillan,1933.
. c:1895. The Rules of SociologicalMethod.2d ed., 1901. English translation,
Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1938.
. d:1897. Review of Antonio Labriola,Essaissur la conceptionmaterialistede
l'histoirein RevuePhilosophique XLIV:645-51.
. e:1898. Review of Ernest Grosse, Die FormenderFamilieunddie Formender
Wirtschaft in L'AnneeSociologique I: 319-32.
. f:1900. Sociologyand its ScientificField. English translation in Kurt Wolff