Durkheim dismissed “intention” and “motives” from his conceptual framework in his effort to analyze suicide as a social fact He also rejected psychopathic states, heredity, and other “extra-social” factors as possible causes of suicide on the basis of statistical information available to him. This paper examines the way in which Durkheim worked out his position on the social conditions he regarded as responsible for suicide, and discusses some of the major problems involved. It is argued that Durkheim did not achieve the consistent position for which he strived, and that his methods did not always parallel his views on the use of “intention.”
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
DouglasJack D.The Social Meanings of Suicide. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1967.
2.
DublinLouis. Suicide: A Sociological and Statistical Study. New York: The Ronald Press, 1963.
3.
DurkheimEmile. The Division of Labor in Society. New York: The Free Press, 1933.
4.
DurkheimEmile. The Rules of Sociological Method. London: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1938.
5.
DurkheimEmile. Suicide. New York: The Free Press, 1951.
6.
GibbsJack P., and MartinWalter T.Status Integration and Suicide. Eugene, Oregon: University of Oregon Books, 1964.
7.
JohnsonBarclay D.“Durkheim's One Cause of Suicide.”American Sociological Review, 30 (December, 1965): 875–886.
8.
MarisRonald W.Social Forces in Urban Suicide. Homewood, Illinois: The Dorsey Press, 1969.
9.
ParsonsTalcott. The Structure of Social Action. New York: The Free Press, 1937.
10.
PowellElwin H.“Occupation, Status, and Suicide: Toward A Redefinition of Anomie.”American Sociological Review, 23 (April, 1958): 131–139.
