Others
There are other similarities and differences between the two theorists during their discussion, which are not closely linked to classification. Here I shortly summarize and share my thoughts on three of them: totem and image, language, and the contradictions. Except for the first one subtopic, other two are the features of Foucault, and I only can find a little of thoughts by Durkheim on these two subtopics.
a. Totem and Image
Totem and image are both a kind of graphs that represent certain items or events repeatedly. In Durkheim, totem is a symbol that classify the world, and a symbol that unify the community, while in Foucault, image in mind sometimes is the free imagination of the madness, and sometimes is the image people impose …show more content…
Tribal people classify everything according to their relationship with others and establish the totem for themselves through the process. Totem in the tribe confers the power to the item the totem symbolizes (dp32). The item thus own the magic power of predicting the future, finding the thieves, and ensuring the harvest. It is the social functions of totems. Also, totem is a symbol that the members of the tribe identify with and therefore marks the uniqueness of the group at the same time. People consider themselves have the same characteristics as the animal totems that symbolize them. Therefore, in Durkheim, totem is both a product of the process of classification, and an emblem the people identified with and also fosters the social cohesion of the …show more content…
Also, I draw some details from the readings we had in class this semester in the comparison. The main argument here is that though both the theorists work on classification, their focuses are different. While Durkheim is inclined to positivism, Foucault is on the edge of constructionism. Durkheim studies “how” classification was formed, Foucault describes “why” classification happened in contrast. And, with respect to Durkheim’s emphasis on the power of structure and collective behaviors, Foucault’s work shows more discussion on meso-level and micro-level actors. These are the three main points showing that they are both similar and different at the same
There are other similarities and differences between the two theorists during their discussion, which are not closely linked to classification. Here I shortly summarize and share my thoughts on three of them: totem and image, language, and the contradictions. Except for the first one subtopic, other two are the features of Foucault, and I only can find a little of thoughts by Durkheim on these two subtopics.
a. Totem and Image
Totem and image are both a kind of graphs that represent certain items or events repeatedly. In Durkheim, totem is a symbol that classify the world, and a symbol that unify the community, while in Foucault, image in mind sometimes is the free imagination of the madness, and sometimes is the image people impose …show more content…
Tribal people classify everything according to their relationship with others and establish the totem for themselves through the process. Totem in the tribe confers the power to the item the totem symbolizes (dp32). The item thus own the magic power of predicting the future, finding the thieves, and ensuring the harvest. It is the social functions of totems. Also, totem is a symbol that the members of the tribe identify with and therefore marks the uniqueness of the group at the same time. People consider themselves have the same characteristics as the animal totems that symbolize them. Therefore, in Durkheim, totem is both a product of the process of classification, and an emblem the people identified with and also fosters the social cohesion of the …show more content…
Also, I draw some details from the readings we had in class this semester in the comparison. The main argument here is that though both the theorists work on classification, their focuses are different. While Durkheim is inclined to positivism, Foucault is on the edge of constructionism. Durkheim studies “how” classification was formed, Foucault describes “why” classification happened in contrast. And, with respect to Durkheim’s emphasis on the power of structure and collective behaviors, Foucault’s work shows more discussion on meso-level and micro-level actors. These are the three main points showing that they are both similar and different at the same