Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
This is a blog for a community of students in Mike Levien's sections of Sociology 101B: "Sociological Theory," in the Department of Sociology at the University of California, Berkeley, Spring 2009.
Theory Rocks!
This is the informal blog spot for Mike Levien's section of Sociology 101B. For the rest of the semester, we'll use this blog to clarify the work(s) of Durkheim, Weber, Foucault, de Beauvoir, MacKinnon, and Collins. Feel free to endlessly post, and don't forget: Theory Rocks!
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(64)
-
▼
February
(24)
- Monty Python's understanding of sovereign power an...
- Durkheim and the prison system
- Memo #1
- Memo #1- Durkheim
- Memo #1
- Durkheim's Organic Solidarity in the ASUC
- Mechanical and Organic Solidarity
- Durkheim's Mechanical and Organic Solidarity
- MS and OS in education
- This essay discusses the difference between Mechan...
- The following discusses the difference in mechanic...
- Durkheim and illegal detention centers
- M and O Solidarity
- MS vs OS
- Mechanical Vs. Organic Solidarity
- Durkheim in the US education system
- Mechanical versus Organic Solidarity and their App...
- Durkheim, Solidarity and Teams
- Organic and Mechanical Solidarity in Maganda Magazine
- Organic Solidarity in Little House on the Prairie
- Mechanical Solidarity and Little House on the Prairie
- Durkheim TIA About Afterschool Tutoring Program by Me
- Durkheim, Solidarity, and the Men’s Story Project
- Daschle, Obama, and the thousand threads?
-
▼
February
(24)
1.) Essentially, Durkheim attempts to study morality empirically as he believes morality acts as a social glue connecting society. Being that morality is a guide to our actions, sociologist diagnose social conflict through morality and thus find ways remedy these conflicts (xxv-xxvii). Durkheim’s ultimate research question is to assess if the division of labor is a moral fact (3). Furthermore, Durkheim believes that the function of the division of labor is to strengthen the solidarity between individuals (17); there are two types of solidarities measured by laws.
ReplyDeleteIn mechanical solidarity, members in a society share common sets of beliefs known as the collective consciousness (39)—this is what holds society together (84). As a whole, this society shares specific characteristics to create solidarity. Durkheim believes that mechanical solidarity can be measured through repressive laws, which is a law that punishes a crime to defend the collective consciousness (44). There are three forms of punishment: passionate, used to demonstrate the severity of the punishment (55), public, which is visible to all as a reminder (57), and organized, to show that it is a collective decision of violation (58).
Contrasts to mechanical solidarity, members of society in organic solidarity have special characteristics that unify them as a whole—in short, they are interdependent of each other (85). The individual consciousness takes emphasis over the collective consciousness as it individuals are interdependence upon each other, hence creates the society’s morality. Moreover, organic solidarity can be measured through restitutive laws. As opposed to punishment, the restitutive law restores order back to the normal slate when a law has been broken (68). It also regulates the relationships developed in the division of labor as it becomes more complicated (166-168, 171).
2.) In my institution, both solidarities can be seen. In the classroom, mechanical solidarity takes place as the students share a collective consciousness; they are all working towards one specific goal, learning the material to pass the class. Every student in the class has the same roles and no one is treated differently from the other. The students’ grade holds the classroom together as they are embodied by the authority’s collective consciousness. When a student violates a law in the class, they are punished by the teacher—who punishes the students to defend the norms of the class.
However, an organic solidarity approach can be taken in viewing my institution as well. In a classroom, the students are all unified in learning the material, but their individual consciousnesses differ. Some of the students’ intentions are different as they are trying to receive the highest grade possible. These students are dependent on the instructor to teach the material well, as their grades depend on it. Other students may need to receive additional tutoring and become interdependent on tutors, classmates, friends, etc. If a student does not pass the class, their relationship in the division of labor is skewed as the teacher’s job is to make sure the student’s are proficient in the material. In order to keep coordination in the class, the authoritive figure uses restitutive laws; if a student fails to meet the requirements, the teacher can make the student repeat the class to restore order.
Consequently, high school reproduces organic solidarity as the students leave the institution. As the students have their own individual consciousness, their goals and career paths differ. Since there are multiple teachers teaching the same subject, many of the students have different outcomes as their education is interdependent on teachers.
First of all,I like your definitions of the two forms of Solidarity, they seem precise and to the point. But I had a couple of questions about your institution. Are the students free to choose all the classes they take? and if not. Does the student taking a class (s)he doesn't want to take, do they share the common consciousness of all?. And wouldn't holding a student back be public and organized, and therefore be repressive?
ReplyDelete