In the 'mechanical' society where everyone does the same range of tasks, solidarity comes from recognition that others are the same as you, this involves empathy and intuition, whereas in the 'organic' society the solidarity comes from thinking about how all the separate jobs are needed- this is more of an intellectual process that does not involve empathy or intuition. Psychologically, one cannot replace the other.
Alan mac is a great lecturer and helped me understand when I was absolutely lost and could not get my head round Marx I achieved 65 in my assignment with his help. thank you.
'Our society is to a certain extent held together by the division of labor, in one sense we do depend on each other but it isn't a solution to moral integration and social integration.' BANG! That is the sound of a nail being hit on its head.
This has been cited twice as an example of the type of recorded lecture that shouldn't be uploaded for an online course, but, as far as I'm concerned, it's great. In the meantime, I don't agree with everything Prof. Macfarlane says about Marxism, but he seems like a great lecturer in this video. Kudos.
Same as, I got 74. Not to engage in oneupmanship just to point out how informative and clear his lecturer was on Marx. Makes the most difficult thinkers accessible.
"endowed with a power of coercion" is a mistranslation of the text for its actually "external constraint" whereby constraint is 'moral obligation' to a form of conduct. Moral obligation is constraning because if broken then it becomes deviant and subject to punishment. A good book to see read is "The classical roots of ethnomethodology: durkheim, weber and garfinkel" by Richard Hilbert.
very critical but in places fair albeit at times macfarlane accuses durkheim of failings that have no relation to durkheim's central concerns. he says it best at the end, if you like him then keep reading him. will do.
The point of my comment was that Alan is wrong about what Durkheim is claiming in The Division of Labor in Society, and not about my position on the different types of division of labor. It is my opinion that our society has the forced division of labor, however I did not claim that i know a better way of organizing it.
@Ohyeahbaybay Because you didn't bother to read Durkheim I will have to hold your hand and walk you through it. By "forced" Durkheim is describing a division of labor where the social inequalities do not "express precisely natural inequalities (p. 313)." Durkheim then gives us an example of something that produces an unnatural inequality: "the hereditary transmission of wealth (p. 314)." As for you misunderstanding of free market society, you should read Capital several times and the Grundrisse.
You're mistaken. Within his model, the division of labour is more often than not something normal which serves as a basis of so-called "organic solidarity". Other, rather negative forms of the division of labour are exceptional and require an explanation, whereas the positive do not, since they are considered to represent the natural course of things. It might be a good idea to re-read the book before accusing the lecturer of giving a "distorted view" of the topic.
Am I the only one that is rather shocked by the "myopic personality" theory? Sounds very dodgy to me. Maybe it's a joke that I didn't get? Apart from that, I rather enjoyed his very critical approach to Durkheim, made for a very interesting change from the 3 different neutral introductory lectures I've had on Durkheim this year (where he was much praised for the role he played in developing the thought of Mauss).
@Ohyeahbaybay Seems to me if there weren't any difference in difficulty or access to the skill sets required for, say, brain surgery, and those required for hunting/gathering, then yes, it would be entirely voluntary. "Alienating, dull, unfulfilling," etc. may not be intrinsically quantifiable, but I would think if anyone would know just how frightfully real those words are, it'd be an economist.
Dr M offers a selective view of Durkheim here. Durkheim invokes the logic of multilevel selection, proposing a set of social sentiments exists to help groups with their "inter-social" relationships." People have 2 sets of sentiments: one binds individuals to their fellows, the other binds them to the "social entity as a whole;" Individuals interact and societies interact and the combination establishes the grounding for an objective moral order. This is a major contribution to social theory.
In modern society, just as in old societies, evolution (now called Evolutionary Anthropology) provides the best answer. Man was created to belong to a group because it simplifies things for him, it allows hm to have a job (specialization) that is true, but it allows us to share public goods like policing, defense, units and measures, roads, public lighting, television, loans market, etc. If you want to share into the benefits of society you cannot go to the top of a mountain with your spouse. The part missing is that modern society perfectly emulates our ancient past where prestige within a group, affiliation through dis-affiliation, love as much as hate and cooperation as well as opportunism reach an equilibrium through your daily actions. If you are too opportunistic you become shun fro certain things temporarily; you don't pay your loan your credit score goes down and you are shun from getting more credit; you steal in a job you are punished (say jail) and shun from jobs of responsibility. Modern marketing tries to push the same old buttons that brought us through the last 200k years or maybe or the last few million. Modern society and technology happened too fast, our incentive structure is dictated by what worked for hundreds of thousands of years. There is, as Matt Ridley explains, an optimum of vindictiveness, too much of it and tribes kill each other for nothing, too little and then contracts are not enforced for lack of consequences for default. To this date, evolutionary anthropology is the best sociological theory of modern societies. We are, MORAL ANIMALS.
Durkheim talks about the reason why most jobs are alienating and dull, its called the forced devision of labor. Durkheim claims that the only way jobs can be fullfilling is if they are spontaneous, and he does not predict that this will happen. Our society is one that has the forced devision of labor, you must read the Abnormal Forms to understand this. Alan gives a distorted view of Durkheim, I enchourage everyone go and actually read Division of Labor in Society.
40.50 But it does resemble religion in a way. Think about the football fans. Some of the, literally idolize their teams, they paint themsleves, they wear special clothes, they have ritual songs...It's secular allright, no God in the convential meaning involved, but in some way it does ammount to deification.
@ofowningyourself You can get this far more strongly with Marx and Weber however... whatever Durkheim's strengths, his methodology was bollocks. You can't study relations and processes (change over time, and especially the 'event') by micro-slicing elements of the social world (eg, suicide, religion) and separating it from everything else in society as well as from its history and future and expect to gain insights... and then the long road to the hell of structural func. was paved.
It is shit I cause an earthquake with 100 000 dead I am a singularity ( nuttung da truin condacta must exuumine ... ) I need my dad and my ma where they do best what they do best so me or it is wasted effort.He is a miniing petroluem engineer what else can he do now ? Would you think McFralane be brilliant as a train conducta who never figured out his jobs duction ? My is doc I do theater film music med and any science somehow.Maybe Cambridge be best ? Move us there if you know and can.
In the 'mechanical' society where everyone does the same range of tasks, solidarity comes from recognition that others are the same as you, this involves empathy and intuition, whereas in the 'organic' society the solidarity comes from thinking about how all the separate jobs are needed- this is more of an intellectual process that does not involve empathy or intuition. Psychologically, one cannot replace the other.
Alan mac is a great lecturer and helped me understand when I was absolutely lost and could not get my head round Marx I achieved 65 in my assignment with his help. thank you.
I Learned to Stop Worrying of the communist threat and fell in love with Marx
am i really watching this on a friday night.......... be a sociology major they said..... it would be fun they said.......
The guilds he's describing around 27:00 is essentially a description of what Starbucks and similar corporations are for people.
Nowb amidst a global health pandemic requiring social distancing, how insightful or relevant is durkheim's work on anomie?
@M0M0K0bunny
Thanks for your nice comments - and good luck!
Alan
Your lectures are brilliant
'Our society is to a certain extent held together by the division of labor, in one sense we do depend on each other but it isn't a solution to moral integration and social integration.' BANG! That is the sound of a nail being hit on its head.
Thank you very much Mr. Macfarlane, I much learnt from the clarity of your exposition.
He got my head around to understand Carl and Emile. Thanks professor
This has been cited twice as an example of the type of recorded lecture that shouldn't be uploaded for an online course, but, as far as I'm concerned, it's great. In the meantime, I don't agree with everything Prof. Macfarlane says about Marxism, but he seems like a great lecturer in this video. Kudos.
Same as, I got 74. Not to engage in oneupmanship just to point out how informative and clear his lecturer was on Marx. Makes the most difficult thinkers accessible.
my right ear enjoyed this
In my own opinion it was more a left ear experience
Mac OS users: System Preferences > Accessibility > Audio > "Play stereo audio as mono"
(just dont forget to change it back :P)
Lololol
Maitland! thank you very much for your help. regards from toronto.
Great lecture, and really enjoyable!
man, thank you so much for posting these videos. great stuff!
thanks!
cheers.
"endowed with a power of coercion" is a mistranslation of the text for its actually "external constraint" whereby constraint is 'moral obligation' to a form of conduct. Moral obligation is constraning because if broken then it becomes deviant and subject to punishment.
A good book to see read is "The classical roots of ethnomethodology: durkheim, weber and garfinkel" by Richard Hilbert.
Fascinating to learn about great people in history, Emile sounds great.
Mr. Macfarlane might want to consider attending the online classes of David Harvey on Capital at somepoint.
This has cleared up so much.
Extremely insightful
@schestowitz I agree! I enjoy learning and I retain much of what I listen to.
How many times is this guy going to take his glasses off to only put them back on again? Great lecture!
Just wait until you reach his age and you will know why ?
I would actually would like this professor to make a lecture on taxi driver and joker.
very critical but in places fair albeit at times macfarlane accuses durkheim of failings that have no relation to durkheim's central concerns. he says it best at the end, if you like him then keep reading him. will do.
The point of my comment was that Alan is wrong about what Durkheim is claiming in The Division of Labor in Society, and not about my position on the different types of division of labor. It is my opinion that our society has the forced division of labor, however I did not claim that i know a better way of organizing it.
@Dinder1080 : yes...one my left earphone...its not audible there !
cheers from a durkheimnian historian
In which of his works did Durkheim write about leaders having the same social character as their citizens? I want to read it asap.
@Duynsathe do B.A degrees only take three years in england?
thanks.
@Ohyeahbaybay Because you didn't bother to read Durkheim I will have to hold your hand and walk you through it. By "forced" Durkheim is describing a division of labor where the social inequalities do not "express precisely natural inequalities (p. 313)." Durkheim then gives us an example of something that produces an unnatural inequality: "the hereditary transmission of wealth (p. 314)." As for you misunderstanding of free market society, you should read Capital several times and the Grundrisse.
Thanks for sharing !
i need this, with french subtitles
good lecture, it will be great with a better audio quality
It's 'over work' a euphemism for a suicide?
Anyone else not able to get sound?
Does somebody have the script of this lecture?
You're mistaken. Within his model, the division of labour is more often than not something normal which serves as a basis of so-called "organic solidarity". Other, rather negative forms of the division of labour are exceptional and require an explanation, whereas the positive do not, since they are considered to represent the natural course of things. It might be a good idea to re-read the book before accusing the lecturer of giving a "distorted view" of the topic.
fantastic, i loved the rant about sainsburys!! and the part... having a cup of tea (which im just about to do!) is a social fact.
That is a long lecture! (1858-1917)
"more share options" NOT AN OPTION! why not fully pre connected? don't you want to know and communicate???
Am I the only one that is rather shocked by the "myopic personality" theory? Sounds very dodgy to me. Maybe it's a joke that I didn't get?
Apart from that, I rather enjoyed his very critical approach to Durkheim, made for a very interesting change from the 3 different neutral introductory lectures I've had on Durkheim this year (where he was much praised for the role he played in developing the thought of Mauss).
@Ohyeahbaybay Seems to me if there weren't any difference in difficulty or access to the skill sets required for, say, brain surgery, and those required for hunting/gathering, then yes, it would be entirely voluntary. "Alienating, dull, unfulfilling," etc. may not be intrinsically quantifiable, but I would think if anyone would know just how frightfully real those words are, it'd be an economist.
25:00 This is so true.
i need this with spanish subtitles :)
I love the tea comments :*) Made me so happy
Respected, I can not listen the voice of this video. please help me. I do not have any technical problem here. - Yours Ganesh, India.
durkheim got ROASTED
Dr M offers a selective view of Durkheim here. Durkheim invokes the logic of multilevel selection, proposing a set of social sentiments exists to help groups with their "inter-social" relationships." People have 2 sets of sentiments: one binds individuals to their fellows, the other binds them to the "social entity as a whole;" Individuals interact and societies interact and the combination establishes the grounding for an objective moral order. This is a major contribution to social theory.
I want to listen well but sounds to slow!..
In modern society, just as in old societies, evolution (now called Evolutionary Anthropology) provides the best answer. Man was created to belong to a group because it simplifies things for him, it allows hm to have a job (specialization) that is true, but it allows us to share public goods like policing, defense, units and measures, roads, public lighting, television, loans market, etc. If you want to share into the benefits of society you cannot go to the top of a mountain with your spouse. The part missing is that modern society perfectly emulates our ancient past where prestige within a group, affiliation through dis-affiliation, love as much as hate and cooperation as well as opportunism reach an equilibrium through your daily actions. If you are too opportunistic you become shun fro certain things temporarily; you don't pay your loan your credit score goes down and you are shun from getting more credit; you steal in a job you are punished (say jail) and shun from jobs of responsibility. Modern marketing tries to push the same old buttons that brought us through the last 200k years or maybe or the last few million. Modern society and technology happened too fast, our incentive structure is dictated by what worked for hundreds of thousands of years. There is, as Matt Ridley explains, an optimum of vindictiveness, too much of it and tribes kill each other for nothing, too little and then contracts are not enforced for lack of consequences for default. To this date, evolutionary anthropology is the best sociological theory of modern societies. We are, MORAL ANIMALS.
Durkheim talks about the reason why most jobs are alienating and dull, its called the forced devision of labor. Durkheim claims that the only way jobs can be fullfilling is if they are spontaneous, and he does not predict that this will happen. Our society is one that has the forced devision of labor, you must read the Abnormal Forms to understand this. Alan gives a distorted view of Durkheim, I enchourage everyone go and actually read Division of Labor in Society.
so quiet :(
Googleplex and Social Pathology
According to Marx, the Sun, the Moon, the stars have existed before there was any eye to see it.
Add them :P
I would if I could
@schestowitz Agreed.
fave part was when he blew his nose
46:33
40.50 But it does resemble religion in a way. Think about the football fans. Some of the, literally idolize their teams, they paint themsleves, they wear special clothes, they have ritual songs...It's secular allright, no God in the convential meaning involved, but in some way it does ammount to deification.
he doesn't like durkheim
@ofowningyourself You can get this far more strongly with Marx and Weber however... whatever Durkheim's strengths, his methodology was bollocks. You can't study relations and processes (change over time, and especially the 'event') by micro-slicing elements of the social world (eg, suicide, religion) and separating it from everything else in society as well as from its history and future and expect to gain insights... and then the long road to the hell of structural func. was paved.
@SteffanLlwyd
'I think animism is the worship of animals.'
I hope you're not a sociologist or anthropologist. :)
19:55
20:10
11:44
i teach cociology
lecture on marx was far better..he is looking very tired in it..
hehe i did all this in high school here in malta and im doing the a level exam. i tthink it wil lbe easy for me to do sociology in university there ;)
That person coughing in the back is too annoying
England didn't go through stages!!!!!!WTF?
cof cof cof
@ofowningyourself I would not have expected so rash and brush an answer to McFarlane.Why should McFarlane distort anything ?
keep caimbridge in the box ....
It is shit I cause an earthquake with 100 000 dead I am a singularity ( nuttung da truin condacta must exuumine ... ) I need my dad and my ma where they do best what they do best so me or it is wasted effort.He is a miniing petroluem engineer what else can he do now ? Would you think McFralane be brilliant as a train conducta who never figured out his jobs duction ? My is doc I do theater film music med and any science somehow.Maybe Cambridge be best ? Move us there if you know and can.
30:41