ipl-logo

Karl Marx Vs Durkheim

749 Words3 Pages

capitalism cannot contradict its casualties. His theory is that capitalism is a historical system and is a consequence of historical events and struggles. (3/17) Capital is utilized to invest in commodities. The price of labor-power is determined by a commodity, labor-time is necessary for the production and the reproduction of profit (pg. 1). An example of this is the simplest form of commodity circulation C-M-C, which is Commodities, then to Money, and changing Money back into Commodities. A different form of circulation is M-C-M, which is the defining purpose of capitalism, but is not capitalism. One item has value (Money), then to exchange and trade (Commodity), and then the money and value of that item is increased of a rate that was …show more content…

Marx theorized that we need to overthrow capitalism and a global revolution needs to transpire to overcome some of society’s conflicts and struggles (3/22). Durkheim and Weber contradict this theory by not advocating to overthrow capitalism, but in other words deferring it (3/17). However, all three theorists did want to come up with an explanation of how to minimize social order and that industrialization can also lead to unhappiness. Marx and Durkheim are similar in the aspects of how society develops. They both used a linear approach, which results in one thing leading to another. As simple as one thing going from point A to point B. Durkheim and Marx also relate by focusing on the development of modern capitalism and the division of labor with the progression of a market based society. Also how markets relate to solidarity and how society reproduces itself. (2/9) Durkheim and Marx differ in what they conclude of their theory of modern capitalism. Durkheim bases his theory off of an empirical approach and one that focuses on the idyllic past and the distant future (2/4). Whereas, Marx talks about how capitalism is derived from the past, but focuses on the present. Marx is highly focused on social class, whereas Durkheim focuses on the cultural aspect of socialization. They also differ by how they view social change leading to a revolution. Durkheim theorizes that a revolution is

Show More
Related
1045 Words | 5 Pages

Both, Marx and Durkheim developed different goals for social welfare. According to Marx, a major problem in capitalism was commodification, the tendency to turn goods and services into commodities. Marx’s solution to this was demmodification, removing all goods and services from the market. Durkheim’s primary goal to social welfare was social solidarity; or a feeling of connection to one’s society. In social policy, this results in policies of social inclusion (Russell, 2011).

Read More
406 Words | 2 Pages

We need change! That's what the people of America said. The Articles of Confederation needed to be removed, the rules put in place were not working to help the government and they only made things worse. Then, a new idea was thrust upon the states, The Constitution. The Constitution provided a way to have equal power among people, provided individual rights and it gave the option for change.

Read More
426 Words | 2 Pages

“I Have a Dream” is Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s extremely remarkable speech, even though he expressed many other encouraging and inspiring speeches. I chose the speech entitled “Loving Your Enemies”. Given on 17 November 1957 Delivered at Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Alabama for these reasons. Firstly, it 's one of his many inspiring speeches that is even being brought up in society now. Furthermore, “Loving Your Enemies” is something that is immensely complex, however utterly possible and crucial for humankind to exist harmoniously in this corrupt life.

Read More
787 Words | 4 Pages

How might you evaluate the contributions of each or their weakness in regard to an analysis of change? The theorists Marx, Durkheim, and Weber each have a different understanding of social cohesion and change in human society or culture. Social cohesion is the set of characteristics that keep a group able to function as a unit, this definition formed in the late eighteenth century. However, the cause of social cohesion is often debated, whether it be materialist, or idealist approach.

Read More
908 Words | 4 Pages

Marx, through his communist manifesto, believed that “modern industry has converted the little workshop of the patriarchal master into the great factory of the industrial capitalist”, taking society from one epoch of social stratification and forced labour to Capitalism, under which the inequality between the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat grew and became more evident. On the other hand, Durkheim saw industrialisation as a mainly positive occurrence which, along with the division of labour, provided the necessary institutions are in place to maintain it, as it causes society to change and develop and thus “civilization develops because it cannot fail to develop” (Durkheim: 1933: 337). Yet despite differences in their views of the effect, both Marx and Durkheim used the process of industrialisation to explain how society progresses and how society is held together or broken, with Durkheim, in particular, looking at just how much the structure of society changes as the division of labour progresses (Morrison:

Read More
759 Words | 4 Pages

He argues that with all the pressures of class conflict and the imbalance of capitalism there is no way that this pattern can continue without a major revolution. Marx compares capitalism to anarchy, in the sense that there is no organization within which only causes chaos. The common pattern of capitalism is a boom followed by a bust, and that bust leads to recession and social unrest. This sort of fickle economy, Marx believes, will furthermore contribute to the downfall of capitalism. This socialist revolution would, “abolish private ownership of key elements of economy and change nature of relationships from ones based on marriage and property.”

Read More
992 Words | 4 Pages

Durkheim believed that society was made of individuals, but in order to study society we must look beyond the individual to the social facts. Social facts act external to the individual and impose themselves upon the individual, according to Emile Durkheim. If the rules of social facts are violated then there can be punishment or social ridicule. These are things that keep individuals from acting out of the norm from society. Things such as schools, religion, and government keep people from acting out of the norms and morals of society.

Read More
1145 Words | 5 Pages

Holly Kinsella 13528163 Q.2 Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim developed very different sociological theories of how society evolves over time. Marx brought around the conflict theory and became the head of the sociological discipline of Marxism. Durkheim was a French Functionalist, meaning he looked at society in a scientific way. Although Marx and Durkheim had different ways of thinking about society, both have contributed significantly to the way we study sociology today. Karl Marx was a German philosopher who became the head of the sociological discipline of Marxism.

Read More
846 Words | 4 Pages

In their theories both highlight the division of labour and alienation as methods and results of maintaining control within a capitalist society. Durkheim coined the term social facts to describe the external and internal forces that habilitate individuals within a society. “….” . Social facts include values, cultural norms, and social structures comprise those sources that

Read More
1091 Words | 5 Pages

Marx sees change through capitalism and conflict and Weber sees change through rationalisation and bureaucracy. Both have differing views about social change and the outcome of such change. Marx’s views are much more optimistic than Weber’s idealistic pessimistic views. Karl Marx Marx’s theory of social change is entwined with his idea of social classes and class conflicts.

Read More
1277 Words | 6 Pages

Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim both displayed very differing views on the division of labour, and they each have a different proposal on how a society should be ordered. In this essay, I will be highlighting on how Marx believed in a classless society, and how Durkheim believed in structural functionalism, where a society will adjust to achieve a stable state. Furthermore, I will be relating both of their views to my home country Singapore, and why Durkheim’s theory of structural functionalism will be more applicable to the society of Singapore. Karl Marx was a great influence for many, including renowned leaders such as the former leader of Russia, Joseph Stalin. Karl Marx first pointed out his ideas about a classless society in the famous pamphlet Communist Manifesto in 1848.

Read More
1433 Words | 6 Pages

Emile Durkheim, born in 1858 was an eminent proponent of Sociology from France, considered to be one of the greatest in his field alongside Karl Marx and Max Weber. Durkheim aimed to study society taking an evolutionary approach, keeping in mind that society is composed of individuals. However, it was not essentially the aggregate sum of each individual’s behaviors, actions and thoughts. Durkheim endeavored to understand transformation of society, from traditional to modern, where solidarity changes from mechanical to organic because of the phenomenon of ‘division of labour’.

Read More
1140 Words | 5 Pages

Capitalism, according to Karl Marx is divided into two major social classes: the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat. The Bourgeoisie, which is the minority of the class system, own the means of production such as land, machinery, factories and raw materials whereas the Proletariat, which is the majority of the class system, having no means of their own production and have to work to earn wage for a living. Karl Marx has his own theory that history is made up by class struggle which he mentioned in his book – Manifesto of the Communist Party: “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.” (Marx and Engels, 1848) and had predicted that the Proletariat would lead a revolution to overthrow the Bourgeoisie. Karl Marx believed that there will be intrinsic conflict like exploitation, alienation of labour and commodity fetishism between both of the classes.

Read More
837 Words | 4 Pages

He thus believes that while studying sociology we should try to interpret the actions of the individuals and the purpose and meaning that these individuals attach to their actions in order to understand society and its institutions. Durkheim on the other hand was a positivist and in the first line of his book, The Division of Labor, itself he makes it clear that “This book is above all an attempt to treat the facts of moral life according to the methods of the positive science” (Durkheim xxv). He did not want to “deduce morality from science, but to constitute the science of morality” (Durkheim xxv). This is the basic and the most significant procedural difference between Durkheim and Weber which we will now further

Read More
1486 Words | 6 Pages

Class conflict, Marx believed, was what encouraged the evolution of society. To quote Marx himself, The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles. Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one

Read More

More about Karl Marx Vs Durkheim

Related Topics

Open Document