Autonomy or Independence by E. Durkheim and T. Adorno

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Such concept as individualism has always been a subject of heated philosophical and sociological debate. Scholars have not come to the consensus as to the definition of this phenomenon and whether it is possible or not. There are a great number of works, dedicated to this issue, among them, we can single out such as The Division of Labor, written by Emile Durkheim and Theodor Adornos treatise, which is called Sociology and Empirical Research. The books examine the relations between modernity and individual autonomy. They explore the trends in contemporary society, and analyze the methods of sociological research.

The authors present drastically different views on the question of autonomy or independence. Emile Durkheim suggests that modern society is conducive to individuality; he mostly ascribes it to the process of labor division, whereas his opponent argues that one can hardly draw a clear distinction between the individual and societal realms (Adorno, p 1). In his opinion these notions are related as the whole and the part. It seems that his approach is more grounded and productive, because it enables us to see the way, in which society influences and restricts the inner world of a person.

Nonetheless, some aspects of Durkheim theory must not be disregarded, in particular, he points out due to several reasons members of community become more and more alienated. It should be borne in mind that the Division of Labor was completed at the end of the nineteenth century; however, we should say that sometimes Emile Durkheim makes very accurate predictions about the tendencies in contemporary society, namely the specification of human activities and consequently high level of isolation but not individuality as the sociologist claims.

In addition to that, it should be mentioned that Durkheim and Adorno do not agree on such issue as the methods of sociological research. According to Durkheim, society should be studied separately from individual because they are not connected with each other, in his turn, Theodor Adorno is firmly convinced that these two concepts should be treated a complex entity. Such interpretation of problem appears to be effective because under some circumstances individuality may affect the development of community and vice versa. To some extent, it is a two-sided process. It stands to reason that society is much more likely to form a persons outlook. However, there are some exceptions, which contradict this rule, and it is impermissible to overlook them.

Besides, Adorno places emphasis on the fact that occasionally sociologists are not able to deal with real facts, because they mostly focus on the public opinion, which often relies on stenotypes and misconceptions. In his view, a great number of empirical researches are not based on valid information. Nevertheless, we cannot say that Durkheim and Adorno entirely contradict each other; there are certain moments at which they agree; both scholars are firmly convinced that current practices in sociological research should be reconsidered. Namely, they think that a person, who studies the development of society, should eliminate the possibility of bias, prejudice and even the distortion of fact. They are unanimous in their treatment of this particular question.

Probably, it would be more prudent to compare and contrast these opposing views. As far as Emile Durkheim is concerned, we should that the overarching argument of his work comes down to the following: he suggests that the constant process of labor division or specialization as it is also known, intensifies the sense of individuality in a person. The thing is that in modern workplace, an employee is more autonomous or independent of other people, he or she has to cope with one particular task and very often there is no necessity for close collaboration. Durkheim thinks that this division should not be discussed only within economic framework, he says, the division of labor is not peculiar to the economic world; we can observe its growing influence in the most varied fields of society. The political, administrative, and judicial functions are growing more and more specialized (Durkheim, p 40). This extract suggests that the functions, which a person may perform, become more and more specific or even narrower. Thus, he or she is more isolated from other people.

Apart from that Durkheim suggests that labor division weakens the sense of belonging to a certain class or group, on the contrary, a person attempts to assert ones own individuality.

Judging from that, the author concludes the level of individuality has significantly increased. Naturally, Durkheim does not say that there are no points of contact, which may unify the community. In this regard, he distinguishes such notions as organic and mechanic solidarity. In the first case, people are united by some shared values or ethical principles, whereas in the second one, individuals are forced to interact because they require each other services. It is of crucial importance for us to show that Durkheim primarily speaks about the perceived individualism. In the overwhelming majority of cases, he analyzes subjective opinions of people. If a person presumes or claims that he or she is independent from the community, it does not necessarily mean that this belief is based on true facts.

If we try to compare his views with those of Theodor Adorno, we need to say he does not fully concur with Durkheim. He acknowledges the fact that there are two aspects of human activities: social and individual, yet the scholar suggests that they are closely intertwined. Moreover, according to him, individuality is a very subjective concept thus, it can be misinterpreted. Adorno claims that many people just cherish the illusion of individuality, while in fact they are just representatives of a certain social class and willingly or unwillingly they adhere to the principles of this class. For instance, he says that many workers no longer consider themselves to be workers and deny that there still exists such a thing as the proletariat (Adorno, p 1). In his opinion, this is just perceived individuality, because such notion as working class still remains. Every person is inclined to associate oneself with a certain group or class. Thus, we may say that very often the claims for individuality are not quite grounded.

Theodor Adorno attracts our attention to such notion as social class, or people who sharing common characteristics, attributes, or qualities. From his standpoint, there is no one who has achieved complete independence from the social group to which he belongs. It manifests itself in various ways: common beliefs, common values, common misconceptions and so forth. Everyone, who deems oneself free from these ties or bonds, just deludes oneself.

On the one hand, it is quite possible to agree with Durkheim, because, the division of labor really makes members of community somewhat isolated from one another, they no longer have to collaborate especially if we are speaking about workplace relations. Nonetheless, it is worth mentioning that the author overlooks psychological aspect of this issue, subconsciously every human being needs communication or some points of contact with another person. We cannot explain it only by the material necessity. In seems that the authors interpretation reflects only one side of this question. The sociologist attaches primary importance to economic relations. It goes without saying that economy is arguably one of the most important components of human activities, but it is not the only one.

Durkheim believes that social phenomena or social facts should be discussed separately from individuality, because a separate person is not able to influence the development of the community. The author proposes such term as collective consciousness, which implies certain mechanisms or patterns, according to which the society evolves. In other words, he believes that any social phenomenon should be studies within the frames of sociology, and scholars should not employ research methods of other disciplines such as for instance psychology (Durkheim, p 66). For example, Durkheim says that delinquent behavior or crime is caused only by some social causes such as poverty, but it is not connected with the personal characteristics of a human being. Such statement has recently been criticized by psychologists, whose findings, indicate that some people (irrespective of their financial situation) are more inclined to antisocial behavior. His approach is a very popular one, but it is not always applicable, because some social problems stem from the psychological characteristics of an individual.

In his turn, Theodor Adorno comes up with such term as average illusion, which means that in the overwhelming majority of cases, the beliefs of people are based on common misconceptions, for instance the myth of individuality. The author suggests that very often sociologists do not study facts but common stereotypes, and prejudices. Adorno thinks that the majority of sociological research methods cannot ensure the validity of the data. He says, The empirical methodsquestionnaire, interview and whatever combination and supplementation of these is possiblehave ignored societal objectivity, the embodiment of all the conditions, institutions and forces within which human beings act, or at most, they have taken them into account as accidentals. (Adorno, p 1). Probably, we need to elaborate this argument, the thing is that while conducting sociological research, a scholar must be sure that the data is credible, but it is utterly impossible because any respondent may easily give his or her own biased and prejudiced interpretation.

Thus, we may conclude that according to Emile Durkheim there is a clear distinction between individual and social realms, and they are separate from each other. In sharp contrast with him, Theodor Adorne states that it is possible to speak only about perceived individualism but not real. He argues that some people only cherish the illusion of self-sufficiency but it is very far from truth. As for research methods, Emile Durkheim puts forward the concept of the so-called social facts or phenomena, which should be studied separately from individuality. Partly, Adorne agrees with him by saying that occasionally sociologists do not examine facts, but deal only with imposed beliefs, which have no bearing to the real situation in the community.

Bibliography

Emile Durkheim. George Simpson. The Division of Labor in Society Free Press, 1990.

Theodor W. Adorno. Glyn Adey Sociology and Empirical Research, 1976.

Click Here To Order Now!

Autonomy or Independence by E. Durkheim and T. Adorno

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)