The Division of Labor in Society

The purpose of Chapter 4 is to further test the theories established in the previous section. Durkheim argues that, if collective solidarity encourages similarity among individual members of society, then it must value repressive law over cooperative law because punitive law upholds the common consciousness. Similarly, if the division of labor encourages solidarity through differentiation, then it must favor cooperative law over punitive law.

Durkheim cites phrenological pronouncements of the time, phrenology being the study of bumps on the skull to deduce mental traits. He argues that “primitive” societies are more likely to encourage homogeneity over differentiation, as the craniums and biology of people in “primitive” societies prevent them from seeking individuality. He also argues against the idea that the division of labor dulls individuality through a process of standardization: He concedes that while industrial development has sometimes undermined regional differentiation, it does not follow that this is the case for individuals, who have become increasingly diverse.  

Durkheim observes how the legal codes in the ancient world, such as the Pentateuch of the Hebrew people, overwhelmingly record punitive law over restitutive law. In comparison, the Law of the Twelve Table in Roman society is vaguely similar to modern legal codes in that they cover to a greater extent civil rights while employing none of the religious

Don't Miss Out!

Access Study Guide Now