Durkheim's and Spencer's theoretical ideas are often considered to be antagonistic, primarily because contemporary sociology accepts Durkheim's portrayal of Spencer. This article argues that, in actual fact, Durkheim's and Spencer's principles on the causes of the division of labor are virtually the same and that their principles on the process of integration in differentiating social systems are complementary. Taken together, Spencer and Durkheim offer sociology some of its basic laws of human social organization.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BendixR.1968Max Weber: An Intellectual Portrait. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
2.
BlauP. M.1970“A formal theory of differentiation in organization.”Amer. Soc. Rev.35 (April): 201–218.
3.
DurkheimE.1893The Division of Labor in Society (1933 ed.). New York: Free Press.
4.
HannanM. T.FreemanJ.1977“The population ecology of organizations.”Amer. J. Soc.82 (March): 929–964.
5.
HawleyA.1950Human Ecology. New York: Ronald Press.
6.
HendershotG. E.JamesT. F.1972“Size and growth as determinants of administrative-production ratios in organizations.”Amer. Soc. Rev.37 (April): 149–153.
7.
JamesT. F.FinnerS. C.1975“System size and structural differentiation in formal organizations.”Soc. Q.16 (Winter): 124–130.
8.
JonesR. A.1974“Durkheim's response to Spencer.”Soc. Q.15 (Summer): 341–358.
9.
MayhewB.LevingerR.1976“Size and the density of interaction in human aggregates.”Amer. J. of Sociology82 (July): 86–110.
10.
MillerJ. G.1978Living Systems. New York: McGraw-Hill.
11.
NolanP. D.1979“Size and administrative intensity in nations.”Amer. Soc. Rev.44 (February): 110–125.
12.
ParetoV.1901The Rise and Fall of Elites: An Application of Theoretical Sociology (1968 translation). Totowa, NJ: Bedminister Press.
13.
ParsonsT.1966Societies: Evolutionary and Comparative Perspectives. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
14.
PeelJ. D. Y.1972“Introduction”, in SpencerH., Herbert Spencer on Social Evolution. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
15.
PerrinR. G.1976“Herbert Spencer's four theories of social evolution.”Amer. J. of Sociology81 (May): 1339–1360.
16.
PerrinR. G.1975“Durkheim's misrepresentation of Spencer: A reply to Jones' ‘Durkheim's response to Spencer’.”Soc. Q.16 (Autumn): 544–550.
17.
SmithA.1776An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1937 ed.). New York: Random House.
18.
SpencerH.1892–1898Principles of Ethics. New York: D. Appleton.
19.
SpencerH.1874–1896Principles of Sociology. (1905 ed.) New York: D. Appleton.
20.
SpencerH.1873The Study of Sociology. London: Kegan Paul.
21.
SpencerH.1864–1867Principles of Biology. New York: D. Appleton.
22.
SpencerH.1862First Principles. New York: D. Appleton.
23.
SpencerH.1855Principles of Psychology. New York: D. Appleton.
24.
SpencerH.1850Social Statics. New York: Appleton.
25.
StephanE. G.1971“Variation in county size: A theory of segmental growth.”Amer. Soc. Rev.36 (June): 451–461.
26.
TurnerJ. H.1981“Emile Durkheim's theory of interaction in differential social systems.”Pacific Soc. Rev.24, 4: 187–208.
27.
TurnerJ. H.BeeghleyL.1981The Emergence of Sociological Theory. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.
