The organism metaphor in sociology

Social Research, Summer, 1995 by Donald N. Levine

The classic manifestation of this problem is the caste system, which keeps people in occupational positions due to their families of origin. In relatively undifferentiated societies, ideologies that maintain caste hierarchies form part of a common fund of cultural beliefs that makes frustrating assignments to low-caste positions nevertheless tolerable. In highly differentiated societies, however, collective sentiments of that sort weaken at the same time that pressure for persons to enter specialized occupations for which they are best suited increases. As a result, the association between the progressive decline of castes and the increased division of labor is "a law of history" (Durkheim, [1893] 1974, p. 314). In highly differentiated societies, forcing people to remain in positions based on inherited characteristics or even inherited wealth contradicts a fundamental requisite for the normal functioning of such societies--cohesion based on individuals' satisfaction that their occupational roles roughly correspond with their abilities. For the pathological condition of such forced division of labor, Durkheim recommends policies that promote absolute equality in the conditions of the struggle for livelihood.

Durkheim's versatile utilization of the organism metaphor appears again in one of the most dramatic controversies in early sociology, one cast primarily in terms of competing ways to apply a common metaphor. This involved a debate with Ferdinand Tonnies regarding the nature of modern urban industrial society. In a seminal tome, Tonnies had argued that the hallmark of modernity was a historically novel kind of actional disposition and a correspondingly novel form of societal organization. The disposition, termed Kurwille, was marked by the independence of rational activity from custom and group sentiment, an independence that facilitated the conception of novel ends and the calculation of alternative means. The societal organization, termed Gesellschaft, was marked by deliberately instituted social forms, such as contractual arrangements, voluntary associations, enacted corporations, and a constitutionally established polity. Tonnies contrasted these modern forms with earlier modes of action and organization grounded on commonalities of thought and sentiment. Because of the natural and cohesive character of these earlier communal forms and the artificiality of the modern order, Tonnies glossed the former as organic, the latter as mechanical.

Durkheim was much taken by Tonnies's analysis. Early in his career he published a largely favorable review of Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft, commending the author for his vigorous thought and uncommonly powerful mind. Yet Durkheim questioned whether it was fair to characterize the modern order as a mere composite of self-interested arrangements, a mechanical aggregate held together artificially by the state. Is it likely, he asked, "that the evolution of a single being--society--would begin by being organic and would subsequently end as a pure mechanism?" (Durkheim, 1978, p. 121). The matter required treatment in an entire book, he added--and delivered the book four years later as The Division of Labor in Society.