Durkheim’s influential works “Rules of the Sociological Method” and “Suicide: A study in sociology” exemplify rational thought and methodological accuracy. An inquiry in applying the rules for examining social phenomena is the core purpose of the essay since it is of high value for understanding the foundations of sociology. Precisely, the deliberate structure of Durkheim’s arguments, implementation of his methodology, and the relevance of his theory are to be analyzed.
Above all, it is essential to determine the relation of the suicide phenomenon to the field of sociological problems. One might assume that suicide represents a manifestation of a person’s individual desire to dispose of the existence, which is rather asocial, of a psychological phenomenon. However, according to Durkheim’s methodology, it indeed presents a significant sociological subject matter. Such a matter in the author’s understanding is that it occurs in a society within a definite group according to a specific pattern. Moreover, it could be explained via the deliberated cause and social fact that underlines it. Then, the suicide phenomenon can be viewed as a series of events that have in common the component of willful death. It occurs in a group of people in pursuance of some general principles and specific distinguishable social environments. Additionally, it could be elaborated that the cases of “suicides committed in a given society… [represent] not simply a sum of independent units, [but] a collective total” (Durkheim 2002, xliv). Hence, suicide can be considered a social phenomenon in its entirety if the methodology of Durkheim is taken.
Next, a remarkable feature of Durkheim’s work is the consistency of the methods he applies for the explanation of scientific terms or phenomena. For example, a specific device used by the author for the intelligibility of his thought is a specific structure. This structure consists of several elements that are present in his “Rules of the Sociological Method” and “Suicide.” The elements include raising a question about a concept out of the issues surrounding it, providing illustrations of the concept, giving it a concise definition, and critical conclusion. Thence, Durkheim reveals his ideas through a uniform structure that simplifies the reading of his materials.
The evidence of the similarities in structure could be examined by comparing the ways of presenting the concepts of suicide and social fact in the mentioned works. As such, the antecedent to clarifying the terms is questioning the existing knowledge about them and submitting appropriate instances of their manifestations in reality. For defining social facts, Durkheim denotes the existing inconsistencies in the use of the term by scholars. Then, he represents the social obligations he has to demonstrate the presence of external pressure on individuals (Durkheim 1982). Similarly, the author distinguishes between the everyday use of the word ‘suicide’ and its scientific meaning. After that, he provides various cases of suicides to represent the variety of its kinds and establish limits of the phenomenon (Durkheim 2002). As could be seen, both terms are introduced in the same manner: through the critical observation of existing ideas and illustration of the concepts.
Likewise, the definition of the terms is realized in a similar way in both Durkheim’s works. In the case of a social fact, he describes it as having “no existence save in and through the individual consciousness” and characterizing “ways of acting, thinking and feeling” (Durkheim 1982, 51). For suicide, he uses explicit formulation as follows: “any death which is the direct or indirect result of a positive or negative act accomplished by the victim himself” (Durkheim 2002, xl). The likeness between the two lies in the simplicity of the articulation and conciseness. Thus, the core part of Durkheim’s reasoning is the precise definition of the concepts he attempts to examine.
Finally, Durkheim applies critical thinking to evaluate the definitions he discusses before concluding the matters he is establishing. For instance, he describes the phenomena that are connected to the concept of social facts as well as their ensuing properties. Moreover, he examines the implications of the concept in reality by presenting various situations occurring in groups (Durkheim 1982). For suicides, the author raises several questions, such as about the relevance of an individual’s volition for self-destruction. In conclusion, he restates the definition: “suicide is… death resulting… from a positive or negative act of the victim himself, which he knows will produce this result” (Durkheim 2002, xlii). Therefore, to interpret a phenomenon or term, Durkheim connects his ideas in one pattern common to two of his works mentioned in the essay.
The methodology prescribed by Durkheim for examining social facts and phenomena is used by himself in his work “Suicide: A study in sociology.” Namely, he asserts that to judge the nature and effect of a phenomenon, one must abstain from feelings, emotions, and ideas that precede rational thinking (Durkheim 1982). As such, the author applies this principle of judging to interpret data about the rates of suicides in different seasons. First, Durkheim distinguishes between the regions from which the statistics come from and establishes the standard terms for the seasons. Precisely, he decides to unite the regions’ seasons according to the temperature and humidity instead of the months of recording the rates. Secondly, he provides examples of facts that correspond to or contradict the statistics that say that the highest rate of suicides is in summer (Durkheim 2002). In this way, Durkheim eliminates the prejudiced thinking that the direct influence of seasons on the motivation for suicides.
Furthermore, the most significant achievement of Durkheim’s work on suicide is in the application of the critical principle to refute the existing ideas about the phenomenon. Specifically, he discards the opinion, typical for his time and laity discussions, that most suicides are committed when the weather is adverse, dark, and depressive. He embraces the data saying that hot seasons correlate with high suicide rates, yet he refutes the physiological explanation of the fact. Other scholars believe that temperature and humidity affect the brain and provoke suicide. In contrast, Durkheim discovers the social cause for such behavior: the social life intensifies in summer and pressures individuals with suicidal thoughts (Durkheim 2002). Thus, the author challenges the existing ideas and interprets the data with careful examination of the social context.
The other effort was taken by Durkheim for classifying the suicide phenomenon according to his methodology. It should be noted that the author believes that social facts should be explained through the other related social facts. The reason for this lies in that the social phenomena are different from natural or psychological ones since society as an entity works in other ways than organisms or personalities (Durkheim 1982). Then, for distinguishing between different types of suicides and relating them with data, he invokes social tendencies. Such an approach corresponds to general notions of Durkheim about the reasoning in sociology.
Then, the types of suicides, according to Durkheim, could be examined. He distinguishes between altruistic, anomic, egoistic, and fatalistic suicides. The first one occurs when a person decides to sacrifice their life for duty. Anomic suicide is caused by changes in the accustomed way of life of an individual. Next, egoistic suicides are committed by people who do not conform to the social rules of their groups. Finally, fatalistic suicides are the result of the unjust treatment of people (Durkheim 2002). Durkheim links the data about suicides with the social facts, as his methodology suggests. For example, he relates the high occurrence of self-morbidity among widows, older men, and servants whose governors died to the phenomenon of duty (Durkheim 2002). Since such occurrences can be explained by general tendencies in societies, the suicides could be said to be society-level processes. Hence, again, Durkheim’s reasoning within his methodology is logical and coherent.
To conclude, Durkheim invented a methodology for establishing and examining social facts and successfully applied it to assessing the suicide phenomenon. Nowadays, his approach to defining the social trends and their causes might still be helpful since it is logically correct and productive. Moreover, his concepts about suicide trends are yet applicable to some cases of suicide. Yet, the limitations of his theory are defined by the time in which he lived. The emergence of existentialism, for example, completely refutes the implications of Durkheim’s theory. As such, the so-called “deaths from despair” among North Americans could not be explained by the typological tendencies of Durkheim (Bellini 2018). Thus, the methodology of Durkheim is still powerful, while the theory of suicide does not apply to the modern world’s people’s behavior.
References
Bellini, Jason. 2018. “Why ‘Deaths of Despair’ May Be a Warning Sign for America – Moving Upstream.” Video, 2018. 18:00.
Durkheim, Emile. 1982. The Rules of the Sociological Method, edited by Steven Lukes, translated by W. D. Halls. New York: The Free Press.
Durkheim, Emile. 2002. Suicide: A Study in Sociology, edited by George Simpson, translated by John A. Spaulding and George Simpson. New York: Routledge Classics.