Durkheim: Law, Social Solidarity, and Collective Consciousness

Durkheim: Law, Collective Representations, and Solidarity

Émile Durkheim, marked by the importance of community, morals, and the law, is considered one of the "fathers" of sociology because of his effort to establish sociology as a discipline distinct from philosophy and psychology. He had two main themes: the priority of the social over the individual and the idea that sociology should be studied as a science.

His argument was that social facts are the social norms and values that are external and coercive over the individual; therefore, they are susceptible to being studied. For him, society is external to us and coercive. One of the main aspects of his work is the link between individuals and society through social solidarity. He does not see a class struggle; instead, he sees forms of solidarity with potential side effects.

The Nature of Law and Crime

While for Marx, law is a trick or a mask that does not represent the reality of the world, for Durkheim, law represents basic moral principles and the primal connection between the individual and society. Law is the set of moral norms and solidarity; law and crime are essential for the maintenance of society because law maintains social solidarity and, therefore, preserves the entire social structure.

Mechanical and Organic Solidarity

He divides solidarity into mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity:

• Mechanical solidarity, which arises from a deficient division of labor, corresponds to repressive legal sanctions; in this state, the collective consciousness is high.
• Organic solidarity arises from interpersonal dependence and stems from a highly specialized division of labor. It relates to restitutive legal sanctions, where the collective consciousness is diminished.

Social Values and Contemporary Law

Durkheim was a critic of laws that punished certain acts when those acts were not detrimental to society. For example, marijuana use in the contemporary context, which does not seem to cause social harm nor harm to the user, remains illegal. This is likely due to deeply rooted religious values that oppose its use, as well as traditional conservative political values. Changing the legality of marijuana use would act as a shock to the political and religious values that dominate society and tend to shape the collective consciousness.