Originally published in 1893 and never out of print, Emile Durkheim's groundbreaking work remains one of the cornerstone texts of the sociological canon--now updated and re-translated in this new edition. As the Industrial Revolution was changing the landscape of society, Durkheim presented a new vision of the social structures at the root of capitalism, and the issues he grapp...
Originally published in 1893 and never out of print, Emile Durkheim's groundbreaking work remains one of the cornerstone texts of the sociological canon--now updated and re-translated in this new edition. As the Industrial Revolution was changing the landscape of society, Durkheim presented a new vision of the social structures at the root of capitalism, and the issues he grappled with still resound today. If pre-industrial societies were held together by common values, sentiments, and norms, equally shared by all, what holds modern societies, with their complex division of labor and non-cohesive social structure, together? What did this new social order mean for the autonomy of the individual? Durkheim argued that class conflict is not inherent in a capitalist society, as Marx contended, but that the unfettered growth of state power would lead to the extinction of individuality. Only in a free society that promotes voluntary bonds between its members, Durkheim suggested, can individuality prosper. In this new edition, the first since 1984, world-renowned Durkheim scholar Steven Lukes revisits and revises the original translation to enhance clarity, accuracy, and fluency for the contemporary reader. Lukes also highlights Durkheim's arguments by putting them into historical context with a timeline of important information. For students and scholars, this edition of "The Division of Labor" is essential reading and key to understanding the relevance of Durkheim's ideas today.
For a man to repeats the same movements with monotonous regularity, but without having any interest in or understanding of them. He is no longer the living cell of a living organism.
其实屁股摆得很简单，立场序言早就说得明明白白，但是话说得真的有点啰里八嗦……不过这还不是最致命的，最致命的在于too obsessed with patriarchy and symbolic violence（这点和滕尼斯有得一拼）把温情的价值通过社会与具体的暴力呼吁出来（都是经典社会学家，差齐美尔未必太远了）
这本书很难读，中间断断续续停了很长时间才勉强读完，对几个关键概念做一下梳理。 韦伯关注“struggle of power"，马克思关注"economic conflict "，这两位都是从分析矛盾从发，尝试解释什么破坏了社会。而涂尔干与他们相反，他从分析团结出发，他的问题是“what bring us tog...
(展开)
Foundations of modern social theory的final，纪念某个清晨，一个睡眼朦胧的女孩被涂尔干的思想醍醐灌顶而清醒无比的感觉。 —————— As two of the three greatest sociologists in the 20th century, Durkheim and Marx have different interpretations of division of ...
(展开)
![[法国] 埃米尔·涂尔干](https://img3.doubanio.com/img/author/medium/public/1502929871.3.jpg)
冒雨先生
生活·读书·新知三联书店2013版
等人来抬你？
生活·读书·新知三联书店2000版
MrVeritas
生活·读书·新知三联书店2000版
chen
生活·读书·新知三联书店2013版
齐东强
生活·读书·新知三联书店2000版
0 有用 SYZZZ 2012-08-07 03:11:06
a crime exists, not because it is a crime by nature, but because la conscience collective define it as a crime.
0 有用 Bâng Khuâng 2022-10-23 09:39:55 广东
補標
0 有用 fka EyeCU 2018-10-21 14:43:31
他对社会分工的态度跟马克思比真是站在两个极端了。让他俩关于分工、civil society进行对话估计会特别有意思。
2 有用 周沐君 2010-12-25 13:56:09
bad science, teleological argument, 以及各种悬而未决的问题，比如organic solidarity要怎样形成。但它仍然重要，而且它竟然还是Durkheim的博士论文。
2 有用 功夫熊猫小碗熊 2015-11-18 12:45:48
这是涂尔干博士论文，最早写作时还在哲学系，兼引用大量伪科学和非科学资料（如女人只适合家务、颅相决定智力），又在其社会学科学方法思维形成之前（1895年才出版社会学方法），故不是其方法论典范（虽然前言大谈科学方法论），方法水平似仅在“我作为客观观察者”“我引用时下科学资料”“我试图用生物体比喻将社会规律演绎成科学规律一般”上。社会分工既有事实层面上的工种细化、任务精细和效率提升，也有哲学目的论层面上... 这是涂尔干博士论文，最早写作时还在哲学系，兼引用大量伪科学和非科学资料（如女人只适合家务、颅相决定智力），又在其社会学科学方法思维形成之前（1895年才出版社会学方法），故不是其方法论典范（虽然前言大谈科学方法论），方法水平似仅在“我作为客观观察者”“我引用时下科学资料”“我试图用生物体比喻将社会规律演绎成科学规律一般”上。社会分工既有事实层面上的工种细化、任务精细和效率提升，也有哲学目的论层面上，人类社会必定如生物体般演化成不同器官分工协作维持统一的有机体状（故而有机团结）。但维系这一机体运作的社会纽带（工团组织，职业道德和社会共同道德，国家作为维持社会的大脑对犯罪越轨行为的限制）才是涂尔干最为关心是否能圆满形成的东西。 (展开)
0 有用 綠毛水管 2023-10-02 07:06:18 美国
suicide还能用bionic reading看完，这本看了两页直接让chatgpt总结了。。bob freeland上课把durkheim说成jerkheim，忍不住鼓掌
0 有用 子非鱼 2023-05-04 00:25:33 美国
For a man to repeats the same movements with monotonous regularity, but without having any interest in or understanding of them. He is no longer the living cell of a living organism.
0 有用 Neon 2023-04-16 00:03:33 北京
其实屁股摆得很简单，立场序言早就说得明明白白，但是话说得真的有点啰里八嗦……不过这还不是最致命的，最致命的在于too obsessed with patriarchy and symbolic violence（这点和滕尼斯有得一拼）把温情的价值通过社会与具体的暴力呼吁出来（都是经典社会学家，差齐美尔未必太远了）
0 有用 鄙德 2022-10-26 06:50:32 美国
涂尔干让我最关心的到头来居然还是集体欢腾这类的概念。
0 有用 Bâng Khuâng 2022-10-23 09:39:55 广东
補標