Marx, Weber, and Durkheim on Labor, Religion, and Society

Division of Labor and Organic Solidarity

The division of labor as a concept developed by Durkheim refers to specialization in terms of work (Dunman). According to the philosopher, the growth of industry and technology, along with the increase of the population, necessitates specialization if society is to survive. As L. Joe Dunman observes, this is increasingly evident in modern society, as human beings increasingly enter into specialized professions. According to Durkheim, increased specialization is favorable for the survival of humanity, but can also have detrimental effects on how human beings interact with each other.

Increased specialization would, for example, mean increased separation between individuals. Each specialized area of work entails a specialized set of interests and norms that are not necessarily either compatible with or even comprehensible to other specialized areas of work. Hence, those within the same sector of labor and society tend to group together, forming subcultures in terms of both work and leisure. This results in human beings no longer functioning as a unified whole, but rather as a number of different entities or groups that sustain themselves in relation to the others.

Nevertheless, Durkheim does not see this as an entirely negative phenomenon. Instead, the philosopher views the division of labor as a unification process between individuals within the same social paradigm. He defines this type of social order as organic solidarity (Dunman). This solidarity refers to the division of labor that leads not to the total separation of social sectors, but rather to the interdependence of these different sectors. Each sector is dependent upon the others for its survival as well as for the survival of the individuals that form its components. In this model of society, all sectors need the others for the fulfillment of their various needs: carpenters provide shelter, farmers food, and sanitation workers a clean and hygienic environment. Hence individuals join a specifically chosen sector of labor and fulfill a function that contributes to the collective survival of society. The division of labor is therefore necessary for the survival of society as a whole.

While Durkheim recognizes the division of labor as ensuring the survival of society by means of modern social and labor tools, he also recognizes that perfect harmony in such a society is not necessarily possible or even very likely. The division of labor is, however, an essential component of modern society and its survival.

Religion According to Marx, Weber, and Durkheim

All three theorists hold very strong views regarding religion and the way in which it functions in the collective social consciousness. The main function of religion, according to Marx, Weber, and Durkheim, is to provide stability and a sense of purpose to society and to whatever circumstances individuals find themselves in. All three also appear to agree that religion is created in the image of humanity rather than the other way around; religion invariably appears to arise from a need experienced by humanity as a collective social entity.

According to Jeramy Townsley, the three theorists were required to separate themselves entirely from emotional involvement in religion in order to investigate the phenomenon with full objectivity. In doing so, each provides a unique perspective that also connects with the other two, creating a kind of "microcosm" that reflects the social interdependence discussed above. Specifically, each individual theorist applies his own theories and beliefs regarding society in order to explicate the phenomenon of religion and its meaning for humanity. According to Townsley, this does not diminish the importance of religion to the individual or to bodies of believers. The aim is not to negate religion or its necessity for believers. Instead, these theorists provide an objectivist view of the history of religion as it manifests itself in both historical and modern humanity.

Marx on Religion: Opium and Social Critique

Probably the most often-quoted and well-known statement regarding religion by Marx is that it is the "opium of the people." Townsley warns that discussing this statement apart from the other statements leading up to it is to decontextualize it unrecognizably and to misquote Marx. Indeed, the basis of this statement lies in Marx's broader clarification of religion and its context within society. Marx holds that religion is produced by society, as noted above. As such, religion serves as a reflection, or "inverted world consciousness." Religion is then seen as a sort of model of reality — a replacement reality that substitutes for the one currently experienced on earth. In other words, the real world is no longer the primary reality and instead becomes a reflection of the religious world, rather than the other way around. This, according to Marx, produces a type of self-deception, or a fundamental denial of the social structures and problems experienced on earth. His criticism of the phenomenon is based upon the fact that adherence to a fantastic future world after death is used to deny the struggle for a better world in the present. Indeed, religion has often been used by those in power to keep the powerless content within their circumstances — hence the "opium of the people" statement.

Marx holds that a healthier use for religion would be as a study of humanity rather than as an esoteric replacement reality. Being created by humanity as its own reflection, Marx believes that the purpose of religion can be much better served as a study of the needs and deeper nature of the society from which it emerges. Thus, the study of the gods and myths within a specific religion as it manifests itself at any point in human history is also a study of the workings of the society in question. In this, Marx takes a sociological rather than a spiritual view of religion. It is notable that he does not deride religion as useless; instead, he takes an unconventional view of how it can be applied in the study of humanity. The "opium" statement, when viewed within its context, is a criticism directed at religion's application by the corrupt and the powerful rather than a generally negative view of religion itself. Rather, Marx calls attention to the fact that the escapism offered by religion is often used to further the agenda of the rich and powerful.

Alienation, Rationalization, and Anomie

While contemplating religion and its interaction with and effect upon society, all three authors also considered the quality of life for individuals within society. Specifically, Marx places emphasis upon alienation, Weber on rationalization, and Durkheim on anomie.

Marx blames capitalism for the phenomenon of alienation, and he does so in four specific respects: the product of labor, the labor process, other human beings, and human nature. According to Marx, the system of labor division has brought about levels of alienation unsurpassed in human history up to that point. In addition to being socially separated from others, human beings are also separated from themselves and from the work they produce.

In terms of labor, workers are alienated from the product of their labor: products are purchased and owned by others, while the worker cannot use them for his or her own further well-being. The product generates money for the employer, who pays only part of that income to the employee, thus further widening the gap between the worker and the product. This directly leads to a lack of control over the production process, which is the second element in the alienation phenomenon as Marx sees it. Employers control the conditions and requirements of the labor process; the physical and mental effects of work are therefore beyond the control of the employee.

In terms of other human beings, Marx takes a much more negative view of this level of alienation than does Durkheim. For Marx, social alienation is the result of the social class structure, in which the employee is alienated from the employer who exploits his or her labor and products. The employee, being separated from all pleasure connected to the products, is also alienated from those who are in a position to enjoy the direct results of those products in terms of both income and use. Finally, the coerced, forced labor dictated by the capitalist system also alienates the worker from his or her ability to shape the world in a way that provides direct pleasure — a fundamental human capacity that is removed by the system under scrutiny. The pleasure produced belongs to those purchasing the product and those making a profit from it. Marx therefore concludes that the alienation brought about by capitalism is beneficial only for the exploiter — for those in power who seek to continue oppressing workers for their own benefit.

Weber's perspective entails a more esoteric viewpoint, shaped by his focus on the study of religion and its effects upon society. For Weber, the main issue faced by modern society is rationalization as a result of technology. Specifically, the mysticism of religion has gradually given way to the rational explanations of science and technology. What previously brought about a sense of wonder — and often fear — has been rationalized in the human consciousness. While this often makes for a much more efficient way of constructing society, it also diminishes the fundamentally human quality of wonder and enjoyment, even in areas where these are still assumed to exist. Weber holds that even the experience of things such as music has been rationalized with mathematical precision in the Western obsession with explaining everything in scientific terms. He holds that this rationalization process poses grave dangers for the human consciousness and for the capacity to enjoy the pleasures that life can offer. Indeed, Weber refers to an "iron cage" when considering the future of a Western society that continues upon this path of rationalization.

Like Weber, Durkheim also grounds his theory of human well-being in his broader theories of the social order. For Durkheim, the division of labor, while necessary for the survival of society as a whole, also brings about the condition he calls anomie. The theorist holds that the increasing division of labor and the social changes inherent in this process also produce rapid changes in norms and values. Whereas past societies were fairly simple and uniform in their labor and thought processes, more complex societies have become deregulated by the division of labor. Subcultures with their own norms and values arise, dividing society in terms of both labor and social values. Without a standard of social norms, anomie occurs: human beings have no clear norms to guide their behavior within society. Durkheim uses this concept to explain deviant behavior such as crime and suicide.

Conclusion: Remedies for Modern Social Ills

In summary, the main problems within modern society, as identified by the three theorists, is that the enjoyment of life in general is diminished by the separation of human beings from their labor, from each other, from their sense of wonder, and from basic norms of behavior. According to all three authors, the development of social and technological change has brought about the various ills experienced by the modern human being.

Perhaps policies could be developed to curb the effects of these ills. In particular, Marx's theories of alienation seem to summarize the general trends present across the different theories. The contemporary concept of job satisfaction could, for example, be used as a springboard for injecting enjoyment into modern living. Work takes a significant portion of a lifetime, and ensuring that the conditions of work are largely enjoyable can also provide greater enjoyment to other areas of life. Furthermore, social alienation and anomie can be remedied by gatherings offered for all sectors of society and by cultivating more than one interest and engaging with various sectors of social life.