INTERVIEW FOR CSE 2019 All ForumIAS members selected for CSE 2019 Personality Test must submit their details and DAF and register below to receive further instructions and guidance from ForumIAS. Click here to register now
INTERVIEW 2020 CHANNEL ForumIAS Channel for Interview Preparation is now Active! Please join the channel by clicking here
Thread for writing socio answers for improvement. It would be good if we could start out by introducing ourselves, and if we have given mains previously.
Thread for writing socio answers for improvement. It would be good if we could start out by introducing ourselves, and if we have given mains previously.
Marx: 1. Division of labor on the lines of exploitation. 2. Bourgeoisie, Proletariate. 3. Superstructure(Political system, Media) legitimizing the division of labor. Criticism: 1. Utopian Ideological basis. 2. Did not consider functional aspects.
Durkheim: 1. Division of labor is inevitable and universal. 2. Functional analysis of DOL. 3. Unity due to unlikeness of the parts/ interdependence Criticism: 1. Ignored dysfunctional/ exploitative effects. 2. Ruling Class Ideology.
Middle Path
Take example of caste system in India Functional Aspects: 1. Balance in society. 2. Value consensus. 3. Tasks assigned already produce harmony. 4. No alienation with work. As Marx says, Work is Self Affirming(Mn affirms himself and humanity)
Dysfunctional Aspects/ Exploitative: 1. Discrimination based on the caste. 2. Little chance of Mobility 3. Indoctrination of inferiority.
So, both approaches should be mixed with each other and social system should be able to make use of division of labor without incorporating exploitative aspects.
Compare Karl Marx with Emile Durkheim with reference to the framework of 'division of labour'.
Both Marx and Durkheim gave an evolutionary approach to division of labour and how it increases in complexity with the progress in society. Whereas Marx saw DoL from a conflict perspective, regarding it to be the source of conflict, ED saw it from a functional perspective, how it is useful and thus functional for society.
In his theory of historical materialism, Marx talks about how a society evolves from primitive communalism, with no DoL, to feudal society where DoL starts, to capitalism where it is further strengthened.. Thus he bifurcated DoL broadly into two, those with the modes of production exploit those with just their labour. This bifurcation was not a product of mutual consent, but instead was the product of history. In feudal society, the landlords own the means of production and in capitalism, the capitalist do.
The structural functionalist approach of Durkheim was in stark contrast to Marx. He saw DoL as a functional prerequisite for a harmonious and integrated society. He defined it as a parameter for measuring the organizational character of society. For him, society evolved from simple polysegmental compound, to polysegmental simple compound to polysegmental doubly compound. The first two stages were characterized by mechanical solidarity, where occupations were generally overlapping and less specialized. Society was integrated by a strong sense of belongingness and adherence to the conscience collective. The last stage is characterized by organic solidarity, where the specialized DoL leads to interdependence, as each individual is dependent on the others for the fulfillment of his needs. Thus, DoL was essential for a harmonious and efficient society.
Marx equated DoL as perpetuating absolute inequality which was detrimental to society where as Durkheim saw this inequality to be beneficial and further, not absolute as mobility ensures an opportunity.
Marx and Durkheim also differ in their conception of the origin of DoL. Marx saw the increasing complexity of DoL leading the complexity in society, whereas ED say it the other way round, with the increasing complexity in society, i.e. with the increase in population and the growing needs of the people, the need for DoL arises.
Though both say DoL as a characteristic of the advancement of society, the main point of difference was in their conception of usefulness. While Marx saw it , at its present form, as divisive, ED saw it as functional.
Question: 1. Critically examine Max Weber's theory of social action and its limitations. 2. Short note on difference between structural functionalism and functionalism.
Question: 1. Critically examine Max Weber's theory of social action and its limitations. 2. Short note on difference between structural functionalism and functionalism.
We are a secret self-moderated community for Civil Services preparation. Feel free to join, start a discussion, answer a question or just to say Thank you.Just dont spread the word ;)Sign in or join with Facebook or Google
ForumIAS is India’s leading Online website for UPSC IAS Exam Online Preparation and guidance. At ForumIAS, we have a dream. Our dream is to make its members achieve their IAS dream. Today thousands of aspirants have joined the elite services such as IAS, IPS, IFS, IRS and other central and state services with the right inputs provided by ForumIAS. Take a look at our IAS Toppers
Free IAS Online Preparation Initiatives by ForumIAS
Current affairs is the most important part of UPSC IAS exam. ForumIAS provides a detailed analysis of important news articles through its 9PM brief. In current affairs reading Editorials Online needs an in-depth focus and hence we provide a separate analysis of daily editorials which is not found in any other website. Click the following link to access these free preparation initiatives in Portal . ForumIAS also provides compilations and Free downloads for UPSC IAS preparation
Knowing is never enough for IAS exam. An IAS aspirant must be engaged in answer writing practice to do well in UPSC IAS Mains Exam. ForumIAS has launched a Mains Marathon initiative for IAS mains Online answer writing. Click here to access UPSC Mains Marathon initiative . For Daily Must Read Newspaper articles, Visit Must Read Newspaper page here. Must Read Newspaper is an Initiative by Team ForumIAS to provide Current Affairs links to the Must Read Articles of The Day from Newspaper.
UPSC Syllabus
The most important part of UPSC IAS exam is its syllabus and there is a need to take an in-depth look at it. Click here to view the UPSC IAS Prelims syllabus. Visit UPSC IAS syllabus page here
UPSC IAS Study Material
ForumIAS is the repository of many toppers’ Online study materials for GS Mains and Optional subjects. The most unique thing about it is that they are handwritten by toppers themselves. Click here for UPSC sample notes
Interview Preparation for IAS
Interview is the last and crucial stage for becoming an IAS officer. How to prepare for it? We provide a solution. ForumIAS is the only online website where quality IAS interview preparations happen. Online Current affairs from an interview perspective are extensively discussed and specific preparation based on candidate’s profile and hobbies can be done. Please visit this link for UPSC Interview Preparation
At ForumIAS we have an exclusive Online page to read the UPSC Interview Transcripts
Indian Forest Service (IFoS)
IFoS is one of the most sought after All India Service. ForumIAS provides the right approach to excel in this exam through their toppers who have shared their success mantras and their study materials in an elaborate manner.
About Indian Administrative Service (IAS)
IAS is considered as one of the best jobs on earth. IAS officers hold the most important positions in Central and State Governments and in Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs). They also represent India in international organizations. They take the most important decisions in the administration of Government policies and development programs.
About Indian Police Service (IPS)
IPS officers occupy higher positions in the State Police Departments, Central Armed Police Forces and Intelligence Agencies. Their most important responsibilities are maintenance of Law and Order and internal security.
About Indian Foreign Service (IFS)
IFS officers serve as diplomats in international missions and embassies of India around the world and in prominent international organizations like United Nations (UN), World Bank, and IMF. They work to promote India’s interests from a bilateral and a global perspective.
The Study portal is a single point of online IAS preparation through its several initiatives like the Must Read News Articles, the 9 PM Brief, the Mains Marathon. If you are preparing for IAS exam online, ForumIAS is the place to go. ForumIAS is proud of ForumIAS Alumni in UPSC Service who have secured top Ranks in past 5 years.
Visit Us At
ForumIAS - Offline Guidance Centre
ForumIAS Academy, 1st Floor, IAPL House, 19, Pusa Road, Opposite Metro Pillar 95-96, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005,
View Google Map Location
Comments
Q. Compare Karl Marx with Emile Durkheim with reference to the framework of 'division of labour'. (30 marks) ( 2010 mains)
Marx:
1. Division of labor on the lines of exploitation.
2. Bourgeoisie, Proletariate.
3. Superstructure(Political system, Media) legitimizing the division of labor.
Criticism:
1. Utopian Ideological basis.
2. Did not consider functional aspects.
Durkheim:
1. Division of labor is inevitable and universal.
2. Functional analysis of DOL.
3. Unity due to unlikeness of the parts/ interdependence
Criticism:
1. Ignored dysfunctional/ exploitative effects.
2. Ruling Class Ideology.
Middle Path
Take example of caste system in India
Functional Aspects:
1. Balance in society.
2. Value consensus.
3. Tasks assigned already produce harmony.
4. No alienation with work. As Marx says, Work is Self Affirming(Mn affirms himself and humanity)
Dysfunctional Aspects/ Exploitative:
1. Discrimination based on the caste.
2. Little chance of Mobility
3. Indoctrination of inferiority.
So, both approaches should be mixed with each other and social system should be able to make use of division of labor without incorporating exploitative aspects.
I think 100 words each would be appropriate.
@GambiTTT and @Khajoor
Please Contribute your views
Both Marx and Durkheim gave an evolutionary approach to division of labour and how it increases in complexity with the progress in society. Whereas Marx saw DoL from a conflict perspective, regarding it to be the source of conflict, ED saw it from a functional perspective, how it is useful and thus functional for society.
In his theory of historical materialism, Marx talks about how a society evolves from primitive communalism, with no DoL, to feudal society where DoL starts, to capitalism where it is further strengthened.. Thus he bifurcated DoL broadly into two, those with the modes of production exploit those with just their labour. This bifurcation was not a product of mutual consent, but instead was the product of history. In feudal society, the landlords own the means of production and in capitalism, the capitalist do.
The structural functionalist approach of Durkheim was in stark contrast to Marx. He saw DoL as a functional prerequisite for a harmonious and integrated society. He defined it as a parameter for measuring the organizational character of society. For him, society evolved from simple polysegmental compound, to polysegmental simple compound to polysegmental doubly compound. The first two stages were characterized by mechanical solidarity, where occupations were generally overlapping and less specialized. Society was integrated by a strong sense of belongingness and adherence to the conscience collective. The last stage is characterized by organic solidarity, where the specialized DoL leads to interdependence, as each individual is dependent on the others for the fulfillment of his needs. Thus, DoL was essential for a harmonious and efficient society.
Marx equated DoL as perpetuating absolute inequality which was detrimental to society where as Durkheim saw this inequality to be beneficial and further, not absolute as mobility ensures an opportunity.
Marx and Durkheim also differ in their conception of the origin of DoL. Marx saw the increasing complexity of DoL leading the complexity in society, whereas ED say it the other way round, with the increasing complexity in society, i.e. with the increase in population and the growing needs of the people, the need for DoL arises.
Though both say DoL as a characteristic of the advancement of society, the main point of difference was in their conception of usefulness. While Marx saw it , at its present form, as divisive, ED saw it as functional.
Is it too narrow?
well written !
1. Critically examine Max Weber's theory of social action and its limitations.
2. Short note on difference between structural functionalism and functionalism.
@GambiTTT and @Khajoor
If have less time, just leave pointers.