Preface

Emile Durkheim, the founder and a prominent representative of French sociology, is rightfully considered a reformer of sociological concepts. Durkheim's sociological theory has exerted a profound influence on the sociological heritage of Western Europe in subsequent periods. There is hardly a sociologist who does not consider themselves explicitly indebted to this great scientist, which clearly speaks to the exceptional value of the French thinker's works.

Emile Durkheim was born on April 15, 1858, in the small town of Épinal, northeast of Paris, into a rabbi's family. His father intended for Emile to pursue a religious career. Accordingly, from childhood, he diligently studied the Hebrew language, followed by the Old Testament and the Talmud. However, according to Durkheim's biographers, a Catholic teacher at his school had such a significant influence on him that he refused to continue the family tradition at an early age.

In 1879, Durkheim continued his studies at the École Normale Supérieure in Paris, where his profound and original thinking immediately caught the attention of the school's professors, the famous historian Fustel de Coulanges and the philosopher Émile Boutroux. After graduating, Durkheim taught philosophy in provincial lyceums for several years. In 1885–86, to familiarize himself with the methodology of teaching social sciences, Durkheim visited Germany, where he became close to the renowned German philosopher and psychologist W. Wundt, who made a strong impression on the French scientist.

Upon returning to his homeland in 1887, he was invited to the University of Bordeaux to teach a course in sociology. Later, regarding this fact, the scientist wrote: “It was a great fortune to establish a permanent course in sociology at the Faculty of Letters of the University of Bordeaux. This led us to become interested in and deeply study sociology as a science, and also to make it the subject of our professional activity; thanks to these circumstances, we moved beyond these very general issues and began studying certain specific problems” (The Rules of Sociological Method, Introduction).

Durkheim worked extensively on the progress of sociology as an independent science. He successfully defended his doctoral dissertation, which was published as a separate book in 1893 under the title The Division of Labour in Society. This was his first major work, in which he formulated the following view: every society is characterized by social solidarity. In primitive society, solidarity was “mechanical,” based on blood kinship. In the modern world, solidarity is “organic,” based on the division of labor—i.e., on class cooperation in securing the means of life. The author provides a general theory of social systems and their development, attempting to prove that the division of labor creates the unity of societies.

According to Durkheim, to move from the stage of subjectivity to the stage of objectivity, sociology must be guided by a rational method. His second book, The Rules of Sociological Method, published in 1895, is dedicated to this very issue. Durkheim wrote: “Circumstances themselves led us to develop a more distinct method, which we believe is more useful for understanding the special nature of social phenomena” (The Rules of Sociological Method, Introduction). The publication of the work sparked sharp polemics among the famous scientists of that time.

In 1896, Durkheim headed the Chair of Social Sciences at the University of Bordeaux—effectively the first independent chair of sociology in France. In 1897, Durkheim's third book, Suicide, was published, in which the author investigates the essential social moments and causes that lead to the increase of this act in society. In 1898, Durkheim founded the journal L’Année Sociologique, which was published until 1913. This was the flagship organ of the French school of sociology, through which society became acquainted with many topical issues of sociology.

From 1902, Durkheim worked in Paris, heading the Chair of Sociology at the Sorbonne University. It is also worth noting that Durkheim was endowed with remarkable oratorical talent, which doubled the interest of listeners in his lectures. In 1912, Durkheim's fourth book, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, was published. This work confirms the author's great interest in the issue of religion: Durkheim considered religion to be one of the important aspects of social life.

The World War that began in 1914 significantly hindered Durkheim's scientific work, which was compounded by the immense spiritual trauma caused by the death of several associates and his only son—a talented young linguist and sociologist considered the continuer of his work. On November 15, 1917, at the age of 59, Emile Durkheim passed away.

In the work The Rules of Sociological Method, Durkheim specifically investigates the method and rules through which it is possible to perceive and evaluate the special nature of social phenomena; the author defines the subject of sociology as an independent discipline. According to Durkheim, sociology is not an addition to any other science; it is self-contained and autonomous. Sociology should study society as a special spiritual reality, the laws of which differ from the laws of individual psychology. Perceiving the specificity of social reality is essential for sociology, as only a specifically sociological culture can prepare and lead it to an understanding of social facts. For sociology to solve this task effectively and achieve its goal, the scientist deems it necessary to establish a sociology that “sees in the spirit of discipline the primary condition of all collective life and at the same time bases the latter on reason and truth.”

Before Durkheim, sociology reasoned not about things but about concepts. Only Comte implicitly recognized the nature of social phenomena as things. In Durkheim's view, the facts amassed in Spencer's sociology are used more as illustrations for the analysis of concepts than for the description and explanation of things. According to the French scientist, sociology must cast off preconceived notions about facts in order to face the facts directly. As a late-developed science, sociology can benefit from the successes achieved by sciences that emerged before it; on the other hand, using existing experience cannot fail to accelerate the development of sociology. As for comparative sociology, Durkheim does not consider it a separate branch; in his view, it is sociology itself, as it serves not the dry description of facts but strives for their explanation, and a specific branch of sociology should specifically investigate the problem of the formation and qualification of social types.

Durkheim considers the superficial study of social facts to be a common shortcoming of sociologists—the fact that they did not care much about formulating and explaining the method used in the study of social facts. Unlike Spencer, Mill, and Comte, Durkheim considers it necessary to be guided by a special method. He aims to develop a true method independent of any philosophy, which will become the foundation of the entire doctrine and which the scientist will turn to at the very beginning of the research as a constant companion of his quest. A clear proof of this goal is the Georgian translation of Durkheim's primary sociological work provided in this book, performed from the French original Les règles de la méthode sociologique, Paris, 1999, Quadrige.

For Durkheim, as for Descartes, the following proposition is essential: “If we wish to be guided by a correct method, we need to base the foundations of science on solid ground and not on unstable sand. We must look at the social world from the side where it is most accessible to scientific research. Only later will deep scientific study become possible... through consistent work, we will approach the essential, gradually penetrating reality, which often eludes us and which, perhaps, the human mind will never fully master” (ibid., Ch. II). The scientific study of somewhat complex social facts—without losing their specific characteristics—is possible, according to the author, only on the condition that they are considered in themselves, separately from the subjects who perceive and represent them. Durkheim writes: “They (social facts) must be studied outside of us, as external things, for it is in this form that they exist” (ibid., Ch. II).

Durkheim's sociology is based on the maxim: social facts should be considered as things. Under the name of a social phenomenon as a thing, according to Durkheim, everything that is given, exists, or more precisely—is subject to observation—is united. In the scientist's view, social phenomena undoubtedly possess this sign—givenness. “Not only are they not the product of our will, but from the outside, they themselves determine this will. They are as if molds according to which we are forced to cast our actions” (ibid., Ch. II).

To study social facts, Durkheim establishes certain rules, which help him avoid vague justifications. In his view, the study of social facts is possible only if the research follows the entire process of their development; a fact can be explained only by another social fact; if this is ignored, sociology will be powerless to establish any causal link. “A social fact is every rule of action—stable or unstable—capable of exerting influence through external constraint or otherwise: which is widespread throughout the whole area of a given society and at the same time has its own existence independent of its individual manifestations” (ibid., Ch. I).

Durkheim considers two series of social facts: one—facts as normal phenomena, and the other—facts as pathological phenomena. According to the author, in a certain respect, they are of the same nature but still form two varieties, and this difference is essential; since any social fact is considered normal or abnormal only in relation to a specific social type, thus the determining cause of any social fact should be sought among preceding social facts and not in the state of individual consciousness. The function of a social fact should always be sought in relation to some social goal. Although collective life does not derive from individual life, according to the author, they are still very closely connected: “If the latter cannot explain the former, it can facilitate its explanation” (ibid., Ch. V).

Durkheim attaches great importance to the social environment. He recognizes the latter as the main driving force of social evolution and the determining factor of collective evolution. “Social life is natural; we assert that it derives directly from collective existence, which itself is a reality sui generis” (ibid., Ch. V). The author also specifically investigates the extremely difficult problem of the classification of societies. He considers Comte's classification outdated and the results of the attempts of famous sociologists in this direction to be debatable and of little use. In them, Durkheim sees not a classification of social types but rather a study of historical phases. According to Durkheim, the classification of societies should begin according to the degree of complexity of their characteristic composition and by selecting the most essential features. A type should be defined by more permanent signs. Economics, technology, etc., are very complex and unstable phenomena; therefore, they are not suitable as a basis for classification. In Durkheim's view, it is impossible to assume that the same collective individuality could change its type three or four times. Also, one country might borrow art, industry, or even political organization from another, and yet it will remain a different social type. “The classification of societies should begin according to the degree of complexity of their characteristic composition; as a basis for research, we should take a completely simple or single-segmented society. Within these classes, we should distinguish varieties depending on whether or not a complete merging of the initial segments occurs” (ibid., Ch. V).

In Durkheim's work, such essential concepts as social type, social norms and values, and social state are presented in a completely new way. With his deep conviction, sociology must take a special position regarding the practical issues it studies, because only methodical experiments can strip things of the veil of their own mystery. For this purpose, he developed a distinctly sociological method, independent of any philosophy, which requires the use of only the principle of causality towards social phenomena. Durkheim's method is objective because it is entirely permeated with the idea that social facts are things and should be considered as such.

The ideas of Emile Durkheim, a classic of sociology, acquire special relevance in post-totalitarian society, during a period of radical changes in social institutions. Today has determined the necessity of translating Emile Durkheim's work The Rules of Sociological Method.

Tamaz Buachidze Dodo Labuchidze 2001