Social solidarity
Social solidarity can be termed as the aspect of human socialization that emphasizes and reflects on the common bond that abides all group members and by which all members of the said group understand and value. On the verge of categorizing communities based on the division of labor in the society, Emile Durkheim developed two types of solidarity in the society mainly Mechanical and Organic Solidarity. These types of societies differ in how individuals relate and how labor is distributed in that society (Durkheim & Emile 2010). This review will highlight the two societal contexts as well as give a detailed explanation of the kind of society I live in while giving a detailed explanation about that societal context.
In a society with mechanical solidarity, its unity and integration are derived from the equality of all members. All individuals are given the same accord. Everyone is connected through the allocation of similar work, lifestyle, training as well as societal teachings. This kind of society was best operational in a traditional context and can also be best implemented in a small scale society especially one build on kinship ties. On the other hand, social cohesion derived from dependent individuals living in more complex societal settings can be referred to as organic solidarity. This often happens in an industrialized society in which various individuals are interdependent due to various specializations in work. Individuals perform their duties separately although other individuals are reliant for the full delegation of duties. The interdependence of the various individuals and societal components maintains social solidarity. For instance, when a farmer’s produce is used to feed industrial workers who in turn produce farming equipment for the farmer. This societal context includes people with various occupations but needs the other to thrive for the well being of the society (Müller & Hans-Peter 2003).
I live in a society that practices Organic solidarity. This is because I live in an urban setting with people from different cultural backgrounds. All these individuals take on very different tasks in society and collectively, working together to create a common goal. In this type of setup, there are very many aspects that keep society together. For instance, all women do not work together to cook and ensure that all homesteads are fed. Instead, there are many homesteads yet each household is supposed to individually depend on itself. There is a reliance on other individuals in this societal context and most cases, individuals depend on other people’s specializations to perform certain tasks. For instance, many people are working in the office, however, they rely on farmers for food during breaks and are also constantly using electrical or paper equipment. In this case, in case one person in the society does not perform their tasks then it will affect the performance of the other (Tiryakian & Edward 2016). The interdependence of various aspects and specializations in the society unify to form a cohesive and fully operational society.
Despite being a solidarity society, there are less common beliefs as well as values among the different individuals. Also in my society, many formal laws dictate the rights and responsibilities of many individuals. Unlike in mechanical solidarity where there is equality in the division of labor, the roles in a solidarity society are usually quit different although they are interlinked (McNeill, Fergus, and Matt 2014). Conclusively, all the integrated societal functions are usually performed as multiple roles by various individuals to collectively benefit society.
Work Cited
McNeill, Fergus, and Matt Dawson. “Social solidarity, penal evolution, and probation.” British Journal of Criminology 54.5 (2014): 892-907.
Durkheim, Emile. “From mechanical to organic solidarity.” Sociology: Introductory Readings 2.1 (2010).
Müller, Hans-Peter. “Durkheim’s political sociology.” Emile Durkheim. Routledge, 2003. 105-120.
Tiryakian, Edward A. “Durkheim, solidarity and September 11.” For Durkheim. Routledge, 2016. 149-164.