Marx and Durkheim had different views on the following issues of the division of labor, the state, human nature and human potential, religion, and the future. In terms of DOL (Division of Labor), Marx believed that the DOL leads to polarization among the proletariat/working class, while Durkheim stated that the division of labor is a specialisation that leads to solidarity in society. According to Marx, the working class faced an increased number of inequalities, but for Durkheim, he said that it brought solidarity, individuals forming relationships with others.
Marx and Durkheim defined history differently. Durkheim believed that history is all about the division of labor, the progression of the DOL. In fact, he broke down into two types of solidarity, mechanical and organic. But the conflict that goes around between the transition of mechanical to organic solidarity is that there are abnormal forms, that show that society does not have solidarity with DOL. Conversely, for Marx, history was the transitions between each mode of production such as tribal, ancient, feudal, and capitalist. This was the succession of the MOP. In fact, he considered this as the progression of the DOL. However, class struggle existed among the mode of …show more content…
Marx said that religion is constructed out of the ruling ideas. They come from the superstructure. Whereas Durkheim has a different view of religion. He said that religion is socially constructed. He believed that all religions are real. Durkheim did not adhere to anyone’s religion. No religion is any more real than another. He also stated that religion is the source of needed regulation and integration. In fact, religion is always a way for society to create integration, social cohesion, regulation to put any collective consciousness. That is why there are so many penal laws in mechanical solidarity because, in one religion, everyone adheres to that
Marx and Durkheim defined history differently. Durkheim believed that history is all about the division of labor, the progression of the DOL. In fact, he broke down into two types of solidarity, mechanical and organic. But the conflict that goes around between the transition of mechanical to organic solidarity is that there are abnormal forms, that show that society does not have solidarity with DOL. Conversely, for Marx, history was the transitions between each mode of production such as tribal, ancient, feudal, and capitalist. This was the succession of the MOP. In fact, he considered this as the progression of the DOL. However, class struggle existed among the mode of …show more content…
Marx said that religion is constructed out of the ruling ideas. They come from the superstructure. Whereas Durkheim has a different view of religion. He said that religion is socially constructed. He believed that all religions are real. Durkheim did not adhere to anyone’s religion. No religion is any more real than another. He also stated that religion is the source of needed regulation and integration. In fact, religion is always a way for society to create integration, social cohesion, regulation to put any collective consciousness. That is why there are so many penal laws in mechanical solidarity because, in one religion, everyone adheres to that