Of Marx/ Engels, Durkheim, and Weber
Of Marx/ Engels, Durkheim, and Weber
I. Marx
There are many ways by which Marx’ methodology can be viewed, and reading through his works leads to the realization of his socialism concept. In Marx’ Capitalist, he expressed how production is initiated, not because man is under the control of political power, but because he is a social being that needs to participate in the production of goods that will benefit the whole society. This was expressed in his work when he wrote, “socialized man, the associated producers, regulate their interchange with nature rationally,” (Marx, 1869, pp. 944), thus allowing them to bring things under mutual control rather than being governed by undue power.
The premise of Marx’s socialist methodology was highly influenced by the rapid industrialization in the 19th century. While the idea of capitalism implied that man often works to serve their interest, the selfish tendency was encouraged by the society by which they operate. During the time of Europe’s industrial revolution in the late 1800s, Marx compared how man must work like the savage man to gratify his wants, maintain his life and reproduce, “so civilized man has to do it, and he must do it in all forms of society and under all possible modes of production” (Marx, 1869, 944).
Marx applied the socialist methodology in justifying how the capitalist society during the enlightenment period is not a means to extol free labor from the people, but as a means to show that productive forces are key to social development. The Marxist method of socialism has a historical implication as it revealed the societal and political conditions by which the people has to live with during the enlightenment.
According to Marx’s capitalist theory, production was composed of the few capitalist or the owners who controls much of the means of production, and the members of the working class who use their labor for production. The capitalist structure leads to several forms of crisis such as the conflict of interest between the owners of production and the working class, because the interest of the former is often in conflict the interest of the labor sector. The conflicting interest will lead to the demise of capitalism because the larger number of the working class will work towards the displacement of the capitalist system, thus leading to its replacement by socialism.
II. Durkheim
Durkheim’s methodology focuses on the sociological methods, and by this he used a rationalistic approach in dealing with his every subject. His proposal was that sociology should be used extensively, yet in a stricter manner in coming up with an analytical examination. He was more concerned about knowing about social facts, and these facts are more valid when they refer to the collection of statistics. Thus sociology, for Durkheim was more of a methodological study, and not just based on opinion according to how one observed the sociological processes. As he described in his Division of Labour, science is governed by methodological rules, while conduct are regulated by rules of law and morality (Durkheim, 1984, 303).
Accordingly, Durkeim implied that the rapid industrial development that started from the late 1700s to early 1900s resulted in the reduction of social cooperation within the community. The introduction of new technological knowledge would lead to the division of roles according to each of the workers' skills, and this would lead to a decrease in the socialize aspect of production. The author suggested that, if the manner of labor separation does not result to unity, the reason is because the “relationships between the organs are not regulated; it is because they are in a state of anomie” (Durkheim, 1984, pp. 304).
The fundamental difference between the modern society and earlier societies is that the technological development created ways that changed the manner of interaction among individuals. In contrast to earlier societies, Durkheim suggested that the distinction offered by mechanical solidarity. He argued that according to the standpoint of the modern society, an individual does not belong to himself but is regarded as a commodity that is subject to the disposal of the public (Durkheim, 1984, pp. 85).
Durkheim contends that one of the problems of the modern society is that the increasing number of people competing for a few resources will eventually lead to certain difficulties. As a means to reduce this conflict, the author suggested that there is a need for the labor force to have their own specialized skills, thus people will not be competing to gain employment. This will result to the individual dependency as one process will become dependent on the other for its full completion. Durkheim’s point of view is that the modern society offers several aspects where man improves the available resources, yet conflict arises due to the need of man to compete for the limited resource.
III. Weber
Marx Weber’s methodology reflected much on the ‘ideal type’ concept which he used objectively in approaching social realities. The underlying idea behind Weber’s ideal type was that the enlightenment period brought political, economic and social changes in Western Europe. Weber suggested that an ideal type is a one-sided emphasis of point of views and “by the synthesis of a great many diffuse, discrete, more or less present and occasionally absent concrete individual phenomena” (Weber, 1949, pp. 90). The idea type is an important tool in the analysis of social and economic events.
Contrary to Durkeim’s argument, Weber claimed that the social sciences cannot fully adopt the methodology of the natural sciences because the latter deals with a definite cause and effect for an explanation of events. The principle of cause and effect cannot be applied in studying the human consciousness, which, can only be understood through the study and interpretation of social actions. Thus, social science should study social action or the behavior of individuals, and the ideal type is a valuable tool to do so. For instance, Weber pointed that the ideal type of a capitalist entrepreneur in Germany was represented by the avoidance of an flashiness and avoidable spending and the mindless pleasure over his power (Weber, 1930, pp. 33). The interpretation of such ideal was done by examining the behavior of an individual, as well as to interpret them according to a certain standard and the existing economic condition.
Weber pointed out that the main organizing force of the society is the rationalization, where the society is introduced to new ways of thinking. For instance, in his Economy and Society, he pointed out that the importance of economic rationality, it is usually achievable to have a “higher level of economic rationality if the management has extensive control over the selection of the modes of use of workers” (Weber, 1978, 137). Weber’s rational was that the working class must be considered as a separate means of production to fully appreciate their economic value in the process of production.
Consequently, Weber also argued that status is generally more important than class because status is considered as a source of group and individual identity. Weber wrote that in instances where the procurement and distribution of goods are quite firm and established, then categorizing by status is more favorable (Weber, 1978, 938).
Weber’s position against capitalism comes from his observation that capitalism leads to the loss of freedom people have lesser autonomy in their lives. As he described in his book, people are held by the “technical and economic conditions at the foundation of mechanical and machine production” (Weber, 1930, pp 123). The capitalist system affected not only the people who are directly engaged with it, but all who are born under this condition.
References
Durkheim, E. (1984). The division of labour in society. MacMillan Press.
Marx, K. (2007). Capital: A critique of political economy. Cosimo, Inc.
Weber, M (1930) The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Taylor and Francis Group.
Weber, M (1978). Economy and Society. Univeristy of California Press
Weber, M. (1949) The methodology of the social sciences. The Free Press
