For more information
Call 1-800-351-0222

MARX & DURKHEIM ON LABOR.
  Term Paper ID:23144 		Get This Paper Free! or
Essay Subject:
Compares views on evolution of division of labor, economic purpose, related to production, class, social progress, specialization.... More...
6 Pages / 1350 Words
2 sources, 23 Citations, APA Format
$24.00

More Papers on This Topic


Paper Abstract:
Compares views on evolution of division of labor, economic purpose, related to production, class, social progress, specialization.

Paper Introduction:
Durkheim, Marx, and the Division of Labor in Society In The Division of Labor in Society, Emile Durkheim (1984) argues that the role of the division of labor is more than to make civilization possible through the provision of economic services. Rather, he argues its true function is to create a feeling of solidarity between people (Durkheim, 1984, p. 17). He states that his view of the division of labor differs from that of economists because they view the division's primary purpose as increased production. For Durkheim, however, greater productivity is merely a necessary consequence, a side-effect, of the division. Its true function is to enable us to live in the new conditions of existence created for us (Durkheim, 1984, p. 217). On the other hand, Marx appears to agree with the economists

Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.


The nature of the balance of powergenerated by the division of labor creates a class that has to bear all theburdens of society without enjoying any, or very little, of its advantages. The progress that it makes is generally harmonious with the changesthat occur in humanity (Durkheim, 1984, p. Marx, Karl. Instead, heargues that the origin of the division was humanity's desire for increasedhappiness. He statesthat the division of labor is based on the natural division of labor in thefamily and the separation of society into individual families opposed toone another (Marx, 1978, p. He can adapt himself mentally to thembefore he has ever tried them out because he believes he will find thempleasurable. Consequently, the resources made available by the divisionbecome more abundant and of a better quality. Rather, it is an effectthat is too remote to be the cause and it only becomes apparent when thedivision is already very advanced (Durkheim, 1984, p. Societyconsists of a variety of segments (Marx would say the bourgeoisie and theproletariat were two such segments) and each segment has its own "organs"that are protected from similar organs in other segments. 23). Once again, Marx would disagree. 192). 18 ). 19 ). It wouldserve not only to endow societies with luxury, perhaps enviable butnevertheless superfluous. The laborer eventually becomes alienated fromhis products because his reason for production is not in any way linked tohis own desires. 192). Marx would disagree with Durkheim's conception of the origin of thedivision of labor. Tucker (Ed.)The Marx-Engels Reader (pp. Thus, on the one hand, we haveproductive forces of private property and, on the other hand, we have themajority of individuals from whom these forces have been wrested away(Marx, 1978, p. 179). 195). Nonetheless, Durkheim does not argue that a cohesive society isactually the first cause of the division of labor. 2 5). Rather, he argues itstrue function is to create a feeling of solidarity between people(Durkheim, 1984, p. He believes the individual would not institute changes that cost himtrouble unless he drew greater happiness from them. Durkheim and Marx agree the history of society is marked by increasedspecialization of labor that generates increased production. Durkheim argues, therefore, that the progress of the division oflabor has been influenced entirely by individual and psychological causes(Durkheim, 1984, p. For when one segmentary organ triumphs, itcannot undertake the larger task it is now required to perform by a greaterdivision of labor. Their differences lie in their diverging views of thebasic nature of social interaction. The Division of Labor in Society. References Durkheim, Emile. This is so because theindividuals whose forces they are--the bourgeoisie and the proletariat--exist separately and in opposition to one another (Marx, 1984, p. Because everyspecialization presumes the simultaneous presence of several individualsand their mutual cooperation, specialization requires the existence ofsociety. On the other hand, Marx appears to agree with the economists that thetrue purpose of the division of labor is increased production. In R. W. 217). He states: "the division of labour mayplay a much more important role than is normally attached to it. Its true function is to enable us to live in the new conditionsof existence created for us (Durkheim, 1984, p. NewYork: The Free Press. 23). 211-12). (1984). 195). 18 ). The bourgeoisie then acquired the means of production,whereby the proletariat (the working-class) labored within these means.Consequently, rather than leading to a cohesive society, Marx would arguethe division of labor destroyed the traditional familial society by forcingthe laborer to work outside the home and for someone else's needs otherthan his or her own. Thus, in every case, new specialties appearand increased specialization occurs (Durkheim, 1984, pp. It would be a condition for their existence. The division establishes that the laborer's work becomes an alienpower opposed to him and which enslaves him instead of being controlled byhim because the distribution forces upon each laborer a particular,exclusive sphere of activity from which he cannot escape (Marx, 1978, p.16 ). 159). Thus, instead of being a determining cause, society is merely themeans by which specialization is realized (Durkheim, 1984, p. This, he argues, is what happens with the division oflabor. It would determine the essentialcharacteristics that constitute them" (Durkheim, 1984, p. Society exists in tension between the owners of the means ofproduction and the laborers. C. Norton & Company.----------------------- 1 For Durkheim, however, greaterproductivity is merely a necessary consequence, a side-effect, of thedivision. Needs of which he may have been unconscious are awakened andacquire an awareness of themselves and begin to be organized (Durkheim,1984, p. For Durkheim, the basic force behindsocial change is progressive evolution caused by humanity's search forincreased happiness. Consequently, he argues that it is from thisclass that will emanate the "consciousness of the necessity of afundamental revolution, the communist consciousness" (Marx, 1978, p. The division is characterized by theunequal distribution of labor and its products. For Marx, however, the force behind social change ismaterialism. The definition of happiness changes as societyevolves but humanity controls the tasks it performs to effect suchhappiness. Marx argues that while theproletariat forms the majority of all members of society, it partakes ofthe smallest amount of society's advances. 17). Generally, the greater the division of labor, the higher itsproduction. (1978). Thus, rather than bringing cohesion to society,specialization, Marx argues, splits it even further apart. However, Durkheim arguesthat in whatever way this substitution occurs, some advance along the roadto specialization will occur. He states that his view of the division of labordiffers from that of economists because they view the division's primarypurpose as increased production. On the other hand, the organ that has been defeated canonly continue its existence by concentrating upon a fraction of the totalfunction it once fulfilled. Theydisagree, however, on the history and effects of such increasedspecialization. Consequently, the division of labor integrates society and ensuresits unity (Durkheim, 1984, p. New York: W. Itis through the division of labour, or at least mainly through it, that thecohesion of societies would be ensured. The need for happiness propels the individual tospecialize in his or her labor to produce more resources. For Marx, the history of the division begins withindividual families, where the work was distributed to meet the family'sneeds. For Marx, the development of productive forceseventually must approach a stage when the productive forces and the meansof intercourse between the owners and laborers begin to operatedestructively (Marx, 1978, p. Thus the determiningcauses of social evolution are found in the environment that surrounds theindividual (Durkheim, 1984, p. However, society began to regulate each gender's participationin a manner that supported marriage and the woman's predominant role in thehome. But as theprotective forces are demolished by the increased cohesiveness of society,similar organs in opposing segments inevitably come into contact, struggle,and try to substitute themselves for one another. Marx argues that the productiveforces operate independently of the laborers. 195). Further, the divisionimplies the contradiction between the interest of the separate individualor family and the communal interest of all individuals (Marx, 1978, p.159). The German Ideology. 19 ).However, these forces are the only real forces in the intercourse andassociation of these individuals. 195). In addition, Durkheim asserts that the division of labor varies indirect proportion to the volume and density of societies and, if itprogresses in a continuous manner over the course of social development, itis because societies become more dense and voluminous and the struggle forexistence becomes more strenuous (Durkheim, 1984, p. Marx's perception of increased specialization is considerablydifferent, as are his conclusions concerning the role of laborspecialization in society. Durkheim believes the desire to become happier is the only individualmotivation that could account for social progress (Durkheim, 1984, p. 146-2 3). 193). Durkheim states that, historically, both genders participated equallyin labor. Humanity believes it willachieve greater happiness if it possesses more of these resources and isnaturally induced to seek them (Durkheim, 1984, p. Surplus produced by the work eventually led to the acquisition ofprivate property and the formation of a separate class, the bourgeoisie(the middle-class). 179). Novelty is a sufficient attraction toinduce an individual to pleasure. Durkheim, Marx, and the Division of Labor in Society In The Division of Labor in Society, Emile Durkheim (1984) arguesthat the role of the division of labor is more than to make civilizationpossible through the provision of economic services. In fact, this class partakes inall of its disadvantages. By occupying this position, the proletariat is forced into antagonism withall other classes (Marx, 1978, p.

If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:

Search for:

or

We can write a Custom Essay just for you.


Browse Essays by Subject