Week 8 Lecture

Recap: -Durkheim about analysis of social solidarity -trying to understand the methods he created to measure presence and absence -3 main agendas: theoretical (study humans in scientific way); methodological (study in objective way); practical (what should we do based on that knowledge?) MODERN MORALITY Argument 1. function of morality = solidarity -primary rule of conduct that all people have recognized as moral character is: everybody should realize themselves as collective type (good citizens) -the notion of collective type is nothing other than expression of particular society -cannot ever get away from society because of moral ambitions -the function of our moral rules (to be like collective type) is to protect the common conscience (common set of values and beliefs that hold us together), thus protecting social solidarity, if not then society disintegrates -turns us into a whole -there’s another moral rule: not be like collective type but rather specialize, do your own tasks as specialized as possible and don’t be inspired -social cohesion, it holds us all together -for complex societies: chaos! conflicts can struggle -baker example again…specialization allows more chaos -consequence: every moral rule has very same goal – solidarity! 2. society changes -it is not necessary to decide which of two moral rules is better one -Q: what kind of particular society are you living in? What is the very best way to adapt? How do you fit your moral rules? -it is necessary to give relative priority to one moral rule -go with organic solidarity to hold society together 3. division of labour is rising -society increasingly based on division of labour -traditions, customs you’re born into determine your future less than the past -trend towards dol = trend towards fragmentation -we will be losing social solidarity if society changes -links individuals to societies when dol is working properly -the notion that my particular work is contribution to whatever everyone else is doing -we’re all collaborating that brings our qualities together to a common task -Durkheim: we need to be free from constraints -morality is when you are dependent on other people, you need to do stuff for them -moral person has social obligations, doing this doing that -your task is one part of a bigger picture ∴ SPECIALIZE! -moral duty is not to be complete thing, if you resist this you are resisting obligation and cannot live in society -you are resisting modern society -you only exist as a part of society Consequences for specializing 1. NOT INCOMPLETE  does not make us into fragments  specializing will narrow people 2. CULTIVATE PERSONALITY  person = somebody who can be an autonomous, independent source of action  something that is your own  make yourself an embodiment of group not good  dol increases each person’s individuality  each sphere counts as their own area  ends up freeing an area of your life being your own  by contrast, it could seem like you have your whole personality when you have less dol  you’re less broken up, but you’re not really yourself, you’re collective  so to increase capacity of person, must follow moral three steps 3. HUMAN BROTHERHOOD  notion that there could be brotherhood of humankind  D: if we accept dol as moral idea and organic solidarity as basis of solidarity, it is the only way society can be brought together, they can feel they’re cooperating with one another  so need a larger society/country, some countries specializing in some things and other countries specializing in other things  it’s not just economic that’s emerging 4. JUSTICE  in this kind of society (specialization), justice will be guiding moral value  moral rules works best with regulating rules  regulation isn’t enough, to work toward a condition in which everyone fulfills a function is when he/she works the best  find a goal to pursue  eg. people with personality to suit themselves as teachers, become teachers  allocation persons to roles that fit them together  in justice, we force people into those roles so they’re not suited  dol allows us to realize -D telling you how to get to the goal – justice RELIGION -elementary forms of religious life -religion as the historical example of deeply shared common sense of beliefs and values -where do those deep bonds come from? -similar connections can be recreated -can find new springs or adapt old ones to new conditions -trying to go back to roots -main thing: create sociology of religion and sociology of knowledge -sociology of religion = identify what is the enduring ethical religion, primitive and basic forms -D studied primitive religion -those religions could see religious experiences in purest forms -sociology of knowledge = things that we know about the world -wanted to give a theory where fundamental theory of thoughts come from? -they come from social origins -things that are cognitive are rooted in society -so put together religion and knowledge SACRED AND PROFANE -there is a sphere that is sacred and a sphere not sacred called profane -sacred = set apart from daily life, setting energy and power that’s not in it -e.g. a piece of bread and body of Christ – sacred object because doesn’t have to do with our daily lives -sacred objects usually have special rules, who to see/touch them -we usually have feeling of reverence and aw that makes them sacred -how has that happened? -there’s nothing in them that makes them that way -where does that come from? how do we get them? -source is society -god is projection of society -