Durkheim's Analysis of the Division of Labor (1)

Mechanical versus Organic Solidarity. The overall purpose of Durkheim's extended analysis was to show how the division of labor of a society was the principal source of social solidarity in that society, and that as the division of labor was altered (as, for example, through social evolution), the unifying forces of the society underwent corresponding change. Solidarity refers to the kinds of social psychological bongd that unite the members, and although Durkeim used a very different terminology, he was addressing himself roughly to the same general problem as did Tonnies. By division of labor Durkheim meant more than simply the degree of specialization in the economic institution.

To show the social implications of the division of labor, Durkheim contrasted mechanical and organic solidarity. Mechenical solidarity is that which unites a people who are essentially alike. Through their common life, and in the presence only a rudimentary division of labot, the members of a given population work out a set of beliefs, values and other orientations to which they are deeply , commonly, and uniformly committed. To the extent that these orientations are truly characteristic of every member, there is little basis for the development of extensive individuality. Where there is little or no division of labor, people not only act in like ways, Durkheim suggested, but also think and feel in like ways. In this kind of society, "solidarity can grow only in inverse ratio to personality," because personality is what distinguishes one person from another. "If we have a strong and lively desire to think and act as others do." I n the extreme case, all individuality would be submerged, and the members of the society would be completely homogeneous in their personal psychic organization. In such an admittedly theoretical case, the members of the society would be completely uniform in their action.

It is perfectly obvious that no society was ever characterized completely by this kind of social organization. The idea of mechanical solidarity as a basis for binding members of a colllectivity to the whole is posted in this way as an abstract construct rather than a description that is supposed to portray reality with complete accuracy. The same can be said of Durkheim's second major concept, organic solidarity. The two taken together, however, offer a third useful interpretive framework in understanding the mergence of modern society.

If mechanical solidarity is based upon homogeneity, then organic solidarity is based on heterogentity. In a society with a well-develped division of labor, all persons performing specialized tasks are dependent on others whose activities are coordinated with theirs. Spencer had elaborated in extraordinary detail the parallels between organisms and society as unified systems of reciprocally functioning parts. Durkheim saw the mutual dependency that specialization produced, and he recognized this as a kind of social force that bound the members of a society together to form a more or less harmonious of functioning whole. But the important factor is that the division of labor, which produces organic solidarity, also greatly increases the degree of individuality and social differentiation within the society.


------Chapter "Mass Society and The Magic Bullet Theory" from "The Effect of Mass Communication"