Contribution of Marx and Durkheim to

Sociology

1
 INDEX
S.No. Content Page no
1 Introduction 4
2 Objective 4
3 Contribution of Marx and 5
Durkheim to Sociology
4 Conclusion 10
5 Bibliography 10

2
INTRODUCTION
Karl Marx (1818-1883), Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) contributed to build the base of
sociological knowledge which is popularly known as classic sociological theory. Their
involvement with social changes and transformation from mid-nineteen to early twentieth
century grasp the core issues of human existence and development. Marx’s theory based on
social critique and conflict, wherein Durkheim emphasizes on social factors. Through this
research work we will try to find out about some major contributions of Marx and Durkheim
to sociology.

OBJECTIVES

• To develop further understandings of theories and concepts covered in the course.

• To develop a practice of learning new aspects of the subjects and develop a habit of
research related to the subject.

3
 Contribution of Marx and Durkheim to
Sociology
Karl Marx
Karl Marx was born Karl Heinrich Marx on May 5, 1818, in Trier, in Rhineland, Germany
(then Prussia). His mother was Henriette Pressburg, and his father, Heinrich Marx, was a
lawyer and, although he did not practice Judaism actively, Heinrich had to convert to
Christianity (Lutheranism) to be able to continue his legal practice in the rise of anti-
Semitism. Heinrich’s secularist ideas and engagement with the Enlightenment (with
Immanuel Kant and Voltaire as the main persons of influence) were crucial in the
development of Marx and his conceptions. He married Jenny Von Westphalen, a German
political activist, in June 1843. Jenny and Marx passed away on December 2, 1881, and
March 14, 1883, respectively.

Marx’s Contributions to Sociology:

The German Ideology: Published somewhere between 1845 and 1846, The German
Ideologywas one of Marx’s most seminal works, co-written by Friedrich Engels. This text
gives an elaborate narration of Marx’s theoretical alignment. Marx uses W. F. Hegel’s notion
of ‘idealism’ and overturns it to formulate his ideology of ‘historical materialism. In altering
Hegel’s viewpoint, Marx keeps a few basic characteristics of the former’s theory intact.
According to Marx, societies everywhere are ever-evolving, and the constant reformation that
they undergo is eventually towards an ideal society. This concept is in congruence with
Hegel. For Marx, as for Hegel, when the utopia would arrive, at that point in history any
transformation would come to a standstill. Until then, according to Marx, the alteration would
be instigated by situations of struggle between the classes. When Hegel theorized that ideas
prompt historical changes, Marx rejects it, and insists that the material existence of humans
(i.e., what we do or the actions we execute) are, in contrast, the actual instigators of events

4
and changes. Instead of individuals, groups of people constituting classes, and separated from
each other through the resources owned by each are, in Marx’s conception, the cause of
historical movement. According to Marx, within each such historical stage, where one group
of people exert their power or control over another, is present the spark of revolution which
causes the so-called ‘rulers’ to be overthrown, and the power to be redistributed among the
people. This process occurs in such a way that the stage in history disintegrates by itself and
gives birth to a new one (for example, the end of feudalism marked the beginning of
capitalism due to a new form of resource allocation taking place in societies). This is termed
‘Historic Materialism’, and it signifies a material-based interpretation of human history. In
the case of Marx’s theory, the final, ‘ideal’ world is one of communism. To explain his
theory, Marx posits a base-superstructure system of social order. The ‘base’ consists of the
means of production (the ‘raw materials’ such as land, factories, etc.) and the relations of
production (such as capital, proletariat or workers, and bourgeoisie or capitalists). The base
shapes the ‘superstructure’, which consists of ideologies, religion, education, culture, law,
and politics. The superstructure in turn sustains the base, such that they have to be in tandem
with each other to ensure proper working of the society. Because the structure of the
superstructure depends on the base or, essentially, the material conditions, the social position
of an individual (or a group of individuals) is based on the type of material conditions they
correspond to, i.e., materials form the basis of the existence of individuals. Every aspect of
the human person–their worldview, learning, career, family–depends on the material
conditions that are etched into each class position. In other words, the ‘humanness’ of people
arises from material existence. The base, being dynamic, changes, as does the superstructure.
The class of people who caused such a restructuring of the base, the class with the “ruling
material force of society” becomes the “ruling class”. As Marx says: “The ideas of the ruling
class are in every epoch the ruling ideas” (Marx & Engels, 1932/1998).

Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844: The concept of ‘alienation’ is one of

Marx’s finest contributions to sociology. The topic is covered in his essay titled “Alienation”
found in the “Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844” among 9 others. Alienation
refers to that situation in which the workers who are actively participating in the production
process of a particular commodity are separated from the process, the product, themselves,
and the others within the society. It is, in essence, a form of denying humanity to humans
themselves. Some also describe it as the psychosocial vice which deliberately detaches two
things (beings and/or objects) which for all practical purposes belong together in the first

5
place (Leopold, 2018). According to Marx, this debasement is an intrinsic and inevitable
feature of capitalism as a result of the kind of production process that exists within it. ‘God’
or religion in such a class-based society exists only to hypnotize or sedate the working class,
and to keep them from being conscious of their deprivation. Marx identifies not one, but four
types of alienation:

Alienation from the product of labor: The work put in by the owner of labor only serves to
provide the wage or money which can sustain them. It is in no way an activity that defines
human existence or one’s relations with others in society. The labor is owned by the private
owners or capitalists, has no meaning within itself, and is simply another mere ‘input’ or
factor of production utilized in the process of creating something.

Alienation from the production process: The people who provide their labor to earn wages
have zero control over how the products are made and what goes into making them. The
workers are not controlling the technique and inputs, and are not ‘producing’ commodities
actively; they are merely participating in the creation of something, which is also alienated
from them, because, once again, the workers have no control over the distribution, price,
quantity, etc. of the final product. Instead of the commodity is dependent on the worker, the
latter is dependent on the former to earn their means of subsistence.

Alienation from the self: In their activities as workers and mere inputs in the production
process, individuals are estranged from their humanity or the aspect of being a human person.
In a capitalist production system, the workers lose their creativity, and even the labor of the
workers does not belong to them.

Alienation from others in society: In a capitalist system, humans are separated from fellow
humans. They are reduced to commodities–paid for, used, and sold as per requirement. Other
‘human commodities’ become their competitors. Human relations do not exist beyond the
necessity of the production process. As Marx puts it, in such loss of human-to-human
interaction, “What is animal becomes human and what is human becomes animal” (Marx,
1932/2012).

The Communist Manifesto: Co-written by Marx and Engels in 1847 for preparing the
Communist League’s principles, ‘The Manifesto of the Communist Party’ was formulated to
promote and instill among people the ideals of the communist movement. This pamphlet
holds the famous quote by Marx: “The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of
class struggles” (Marx & Engels, 1992). Marx identifies two distinct and conflicting classes

6
within capitalism: the bourgeoisie (or the owners of the means of production who earn
profits) and the proletariat (the owners of labor power who earn wages). Ownership of private
property by a handful of people is the chief issue as it leads to exploitation of the workers.
The Communist Manifesto traces the emergence of Capitalism and posits events that will
lead to its eventual and inevitable destruction through the development of ‘class-
consciousness’ among the proletariats. Marx also defines a list of measures that can be
undertaken to restore power to the common people. In sum, the Manifesto is a written
demonstration of the communist ideology.

Das Kapital: In this work, Marx integrates both social and economic analysis of capitalism.
Marx uses the help of several of Adam Smith’s ideas to generate his own analysis of the
capitalist system. In the ‘Capital’, Marx provides a detailed criticism of the social and
economic organization under capitalism which renders private owners more powerful than
the workers having the actual labor strength. Marx theorizes that the economic structure of
capitalism is sure to cause its own downfall.

Emile Durkheim
Among the contemporary Sociologists Emile Durkheim, the French genius occupies an
important place. He was born in 1858 at Epinal in France. Mostly he was a teacher of
sociology in the University of Bordeaux and Paris. He had some major works which became
a dominant force in the development of Sociology. in 1917 he was buried at the
Montparnasse Cemetery in Paris.

Emile Durkheim Contributions to Sociology

Emile Durkheim was definitely one of the most important contributors to sociological
knowledge. His “comparative method” leads to the importance of studying different types of
society comparatively. Durkheim believed that we must study social life with the same
objectivity as scientists study the natural world. He was the first sociologist who emphasized
the reality of society. He introduced “Rules of sociological method” to carry out the scientific
study of society. Durkheim’s opinion is that man’s social behavior has to understand not by
personal view but by social background. He says that human event is called “social”.
According to him, we perform every action in the interest of society. Our duties and practices
are defined through law and custom. We have not created the duties, but have inherited them
through our education these types of conduct are called ‘social facts’ in the words of

7
Durkheim. “A social fact is every way of acting, fixed or not. Capable of exercising on the
individual an entemal constraint. Durkheim used the theory of “Anomie” in his book on the
Davison of labor in society. To him suicide is a social fact that takes place due to external
force. He outlined four types of suicide.

(a) Egoistic Suicide:

Durkheim believed that the best parts of human beings like our morality, values and sense of
purpose etc. come from society. An integrated society provides us with these things and
moral support. The people who have lost group attachment, they commit suicide because of
frustration.

Here the individual is not well integrated into the larger unit. This lack of integration leads to
a feeling that neither the individual is part of neither society nor the society is part of the
individual. So egoistic suicide implies that the person commits suicide when he thinks
primarily of himself when he is not integrated into the social group.

Durkheim affirms the importance of social forces in case of egoistic suicide also, where the
individual might be thought to be free of social constraints.

(b) Altruistic Suicide:

This is the second type of suicide given by Durkheim. From the above discussion of egoistic
suicide we come to know that egoistic suicide is more likely to occur when social integration
is too weak. But in case of altruistic suicide, social integration is too strong. More generally,
the persons committing altruistic suicide feel that it is their duty to do so. Durkheim argued
that in case of military, altruistic suicide is most prominent because the degree of integration
is so strong that the individual will feel that he has disgraced the entire group in its failure.

(c) Anomic Suicide:

The third major form of suicide given by Durkheim is anomic suicide. This type of suicide is
more likely to occur when regulation is too weak. It is caused due to extreme frustration of an
individual. According to Durkheim, “in anomic suicide, society’s influence is lacking
basically in the individual passions, thus leaving them without a check therein.” Anomic is a
chronic state of affairs in the modern socio-economic system. It occurs during industrial or
financial crises. He showed that there was a high rate of anomic suicide among the wealthy as

8
well as divorced persons as most of them are not in a positive to adjust themselves to violent
changes in their life system and set up.

(d) Fatalistic Suicide:

There is a little-mentioned fourth type of suicide-fatalistic that Durkheim discussed only in a

footnote in ‘Suicide’ as said by Bernard. It is more likely to occur when regulation is
excessive. Durkheim described that person more likely commit fatalistic suicide whose future
is pitilessly blocked and whose passions are violently chocked. The classic example is the
slave who takes his own life because of too much regulation.

Durkheim was impressed by the fact that religion is universal in human society and he felt
that religion plays vital role in maintaining society as whole religious beliefs emerges from
society and helps to hold the society together. Durkheim laid foundation for various
specialized fields of study like General Sociology, sociology of religion, sociology of morals,
sociology of law, sociology of crime, economic sociology and sociology of aesthetics, etc.
The major works of Emile Durkheim are “The division of Labour in society”, “Suicide”,
“The Rules of sociological method”, “The Elementary forms of religious Life”.

Conclusion
Karl Marx and Emile Durkheim are two of the founding figures of sociology. They were the
first to explore the relationship between the economy and society in the nineteenth and
twentieth century, each developing different perspectives of society. Despite them having
significantly different views on modern capitalism, they both played a prominent role in the
development of sociology as an academic discipline

BIBLIOGRAPHY
• Anthony Giddens, Duneier, Mitchell, Applebaum, Richard, Introduction to Sociology,
Sixth Edition, New York: W.W. Norton and Company, (Chapter 1), 2007.

9
• Haralambos & Holborn, Sociology: Themes and Perspectives, 6th ed, Collins
Educational, 2000
• www.wikipedia.org
• www.britannica.com
• www.researchgate.net

10