Durkheims Approach to Analyzing Social Life as Shown in Suicide - Term Paper Example

DURKHEIM’S APPROACH TO ANALYZING SOCIAL LIFE AS SHOWN IN SUICIDE Student’s name Code+ course name Professor’s name University name City, State Date Durkheim’s Approach to Analyzing Social Life as Shown in Suicide Introduction Suicide has been described variously as the highest level of social disorganization at an individual level (Marra & Orrù 1991). Suicide is the process of ending one’s own life usually without justifiable reasons. Many social and psychological theories have been advanced to explain the phenomenon. Among the most prominent people in the field of social sciences and psychology that have up with theories to explain such social phenomena as suicide is Emile Durkheim. Durkheim, who is associated with the late 19th century and the early twentieth century, used various social variables to explain the phenomenon of suicide. The theories of Durkheim have been criticized by many sociologists as not being justifiable. However, the theories of the sociologist are based on real life examples such as martyrdom and suicide bombing. This paper seeks to explain the key features of Durkheim’s approach to analyzing social life as shown in Suicide in light of the strengths and weaknesses of such approach. In explaining suicide, Durkheim used a number of variables. Such variables were all socio-economical and political in nature. The factors that the sociologists used in developing his approach were those that affect large social groups (Marra & Orrù 1991). These are the things that are currently referred to as the principal features of the approach. One of the unique features of the approach adopted by Durkheim is that it employed macro factors in explaining the rationale behind the micro social phenomena of suicide. The variables employed by the sociologist revolved around religion, social identity, gender, marital status, social classes, profession, environment, regions of origin, and individual perceptions. These features of the social system will be evaluated in detail. All the above mentioned features of the approach are equally valuable in explaining the observable facts of suicide and can be used in analyzing many other social occurrences. The sociologists approach employs religion as a key feature in explaining social occurrences such as suicide (Pescosolido & Georgiana 1989). In his studies and investigations into suicide, Durkheim focused on two denominations of Christianity: catholic and the Protestants churches. The results of the researches indicated that the rate of suicide among the protestant faithful was higher than it was among the catholic believers. This, according to Durkheim could be attributed to the fact that the catholic faith taught the followers on the need for social stability and emotional control. According to Durkheim, the catholic faith did this through discouraging such things as hysterical worship among its followers. Durkheim explained the role of the religious beliefs of the community on the conducts of the members of the society. The argument by the sociologist was based on the fact that, during that time, religion was an indispensable part of the normal life of the community members. It is worth noting that, during the late nineteenth century and the early twentieth century, during which time Durkheim was doing his researches, religion was a key political influence. The clergy were part of the key decision making authorities in the society. In his investigations into suicide, the sociologist as well focused on the Jews. His overall findings indicated that the catholic faithful were more in control of their lives than the Christians and Jews. It was for this reason then why the cases of suicide among the catholic community were fewer compared to the other two faiths. The second feature of the approach is the use of gender in analyzing various trends in society. In his attempts to explain the concept of suicide, Durkheim investigated the frequency of the phenomenon among the females and males differently (Berk 2006). From his findings, it was established that the phenomenon way more rampant among the males than it was in the ladies. This, he said, was because women are psychologically capable of accommodating stress, since they have various ways of getting over such things. For instance, Durkheim argued that, unlike men, the women were capable of sharing their emotions and stress. For instance, they can seek counseling or resort to such natural emotional processes as crying. Gender was and indeed is still a particularly prominent feature of the social analysis approach because males and females have different psychological make ups. Related to the aspect of gender is the element of marital statuses of people in the society. Durkheim’s studies took into consideration the marital statuses of those people that were disorganized as to the extent of committing suicide (Breault & Barkey 1982). The findings indicated that the majority of suicide cases were those that were not married. According to the psychologist, the married people are less likely to be socially disorganized. According to Durkheim, such social institutions as marriage provide a person with comfort and a sense of belonging. This sense of affiliation makes a person feel safe. As such, they can seek guidance, counseling and reflective advice from their family members and partners. The psychologist established that people in marriage and other close relationships with people were less likely to commit suicide except in circumstances where such families and social relations were the causes of stress and depression. Durkheim who attributed social phenomena to social classes and professions argued that a certain condition in the society could not impact on the different classes equally or in a similar way (Pescosolido & Georgiana 1989). The way the rich could react to hunger, for example, is not at all related to the manner in which the poor react to the same. The reactions between the haves and the have-nots are extremely different. Durkheim established that the cases of suicide were particularly common among the poor and the low income earners in the community. Durkheim attributed this to the fact that the economically weak and the low income brackets were under the political and social pressures of life, which they could not deal with. As such, they resorted to suicide. It is quite practical to comprehend that most of the social problems such as hunger, ignorance and disease are rampant among the poor. Similarly, Durkheim associated social struggle to the inconsistencies in the professions and occupations of the members of the society. According to his findings, for instance, men in the military were found to be taking suicide as an appropriate option. This, according to many psychologists can be attributed to the fact that the men in the military work, in an environment where death does not mean much. Yet the conditions are quite unbearable. Another feature of the approach taken by Durkheim is the environmental conditions. This feature may appear as being irrelevant in the evaluation of social phenomena but is of tremendous importance in making social assessments. According to Durkheim, using this feature may reveal things that appear impossible and unrealistic (Breault & Barkey 1982). For instance, in his investigation into the concept of suicide, he established that the cases of people killing themselves were rampant during times of peace as compared to times of social strife and civil upheavals. This was noted during the time of the American civil war. The studies revealed that, in times of war, people sought various ways of shielding their lives against the enemies. It was rather ironical that, after the war, the cases of suicide went back on the rise as they were before the armed conflict. It is noteworthy that social identity was a principal feature in the approach that Durkheim took in explaining social events like the issue of martyrdom. Being a martyr is one way of committing suicide. Martyrdom entails giving up on a person’s life for the sake of the faction to which they are associated (Berk 2006). This, according to Durkheim, is a condition in which the person loses a sense of individualism. They stop thinking about themselves because they are so committed to a certain group or social inclination. The most common example that can explain this is the decision by people to commit suicide for the sake of others. When a suicide bomber crashed into the world centre on September eleventh 2001, he was doing it for the sake of his group of terrorists and his religion, as people came to understand later on. Durkheim’s approach embraced the aspect of individual interests, perceptions and satisfaction. From the point of view of anomic suicide, the individuals committed suicide because they had not attained that which their hearts and consciences wanted to achieve (Berk 2006). Durkheim explained that a person can decide to end their life for the simple reason that they were unsatisfied with the lives they were leading. It is common to find people that are so much focused on one thing to the extent that if they do not achieve it, they become stressed and in some cases, undergo depression that can cause a person to have suicidal thoughts. The individual perceptions of ideal life vary from one individual to another. To understand and appreciate the theory of Durkheim, it is essential to look at the way in which he described the three principal types of suicide. From his analysis of this form, it will be easier to understand the cause for certain social conducts (Dohrenwend 1959). The first type of suicide explained by the psychologist was the altruistic form of suicide. This was explained as a form of death that individuals consented to due to loss of individualism and embracing of group identity. This was explained by example of the suicide bombers that opted to lose their lives and bodies for the sake of their beliefs so that their families could be compensated. The second type of suicide according to Durkheim is the fatalistic suicide. This form was as well connected to the suicide bomber terrorists. The difference between this type and the altruist, however, is the fact that the individuals resort to martyrdom for the sake of the political and social pressures of life (Pescosolido & Georgiana 1989). They, therefore, opt to die so that their families can be compensated. The last type is the anomic type of suicide. This type is committed simply because one has not achieved their desires. The strengths of the approach adopted by Durkheim The major strength of the approach adopted by Durkheim is that it drew from real life situations (Marra & Orrù 1991). This brings out the approach as being practical and realistic. The features that Durkheim employed in creating this approach are part and parcel of everyday life. They are the building blocks of present socio-economic and political practices. In developing his theory, Durkheim observed various social institutions in real time. For instance, in weighing between the situations of peace and war, he research throughout the period of war up to the time it came to an end. This means that he made the observations in all stages of the civil unrest. This is particularly valuable in the sense that the approach did not rely on assumptions. The approach can be said to be quite comprehensive as it touches on all those aspects that affect each and every single member of the society (Pescosolido & Georgiana 1989). It is of essence to note that such institutions as marriage touch on everybody, the poor and the rich alike. By using such social institutions, Durkheim’s approach is capable of touching on all social classes. Additionally, the decision by Durkheim to use suicide as a way of evaluating the society was quite appropriate since suicide is one of those phenomena that touch on all the social classes. The fact that the psychologist used the concept of social identity makes the approach more understandable to the various divisions of the society. This is because every member of society is affiliated to a couple of groups. The weaknesses of the Durkheim’s approach One of the greatest weaknesses of the approach is that the approach employs large social factors to explain micro social aspects (Marra & Orrù 1991). For instance, it is not realistic for a researcher to employ such a large social factor as religion to explain such a small phenomenon as the act of one person taking away their life. This has been the point of reference for the critics of the Durkheim approach. This criticism has some truth in it. Related to this fact is the weakness that various groups and institutions define things differently. For instance, that which may qualify to be called suicide in one religion may not be referred to as suicide in another faith (Berk 2006). This can be elaborated using the example of the suicide bomber that crushed into the world trade centre on September eleventh of the year two thousand and one. To the Muslim community, the man was seen as a hero or rather a warrior who had participated in a holy war, referred t as jihad in their beliefs. While the Christians and other non Islamic faiths found the act irrational and unjustified, the Islam argued that the man had died for the sake of their god Allah, and as such, the terrorist had gone to heaven. The theory of Durkheim, according to critics was socially obsolete (Pescosolido & Georgiana 1989). The major reason behind this assumption is the fact the social set up during the time the psychologist was coming up with the theory was so different from the contemporary social arrangements. It is worth noting that, during the late twentieth century and the early twentieth century, the religious institutions and leaders were immensely powerful political determinants. On the contrary, the clergy in the current world is not the almighty powerhouse that it was back in the day. As such, contemporary sociologists and psychologists argue that the approach of Durkheim has no ground today. It cannot be applied to effectively explain social phenomena. Reference list Berk, B. B. 2006. Macro-Micro Relationships in Durkheim's Analysis of Egoistic Suicide. Sociological Theory. Vol. 24 Issue 1, p58-80. Breault, K.D & Barkey, K. A 1982. Comparative Analysis of Durkheim's Theory of Egoistic Suicide. Sociological Quarterly. Vol. 23 Issue 3, p321-331. Dohrenwend, B. P. 1959. Egoism, Altruism, Anomie, and Fatalism: A Conceptual Analysis of Durkheim's Types. American Sociological Review. Vol. 24 Issue 4, p466-473. Marra, R & Orrù, M. 1991. Social images of suicide. British Journal of Sociology. Vol. 42 Issue 2, p273-288. Pescosolido, B. & Georgiana, S. 1989. Durkheim, Suicide, and Religion: Toward A Network Theory of Suicide. American Sociological Review. Vol. 54 Issue 1, p33-48. Read More