Estructural funcionalista emile durkheim biography
•
Sociology
•
EMILE DURKHEIM: HIS METHODOLOGY AND USES OF HISTORY
Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences Volume 22, April 1986 EMILE DURKHEIM: HIS METHODOLOGY AND USES OF HISTORY J. DAVID KNOTTNERUS Despite a resurgence of interest in Durkheim, insufficient attention has been directed toward his social morphology. The result is an underestimation of the role of history in his sociology and conception of unified science. The author argues that from the earliest stages of his intellectual career Durkheim displayed a sensitivity to the value of historical investigation for social explanation. This interest, reflecting various influences in the intellectual milieux of his time, varied among three distinct historical perspectives and methodological frameworks: the comparative, the evolutionary, and the developmental. Differentiating the three approaches counteracts the tendency among interpreters to collapse all three into the evolutionary framework alone. A resurgence of interest in Emile
•
In summary, my three formulations of Durkheim's The Rules of Sociological Method as a manifesto have progressively found it to be epistemologically and pedagogically embedded in its object of scientific interest. In the first and most... more
In summary, my three formulations of Durkheim's The Rules of Sociological Method as a manifesto have progressively found it to be epistemologically and pedagogically embedded in its object of scientific interest. In the first and most limited formulation, Durkheim's text was a violent and strategic preparation for his vision of sociology, that laid its grounds, but was ultimately inessential to sociological practice itself. It marked what he hoped was a historical rupture in western thought, after which true sociological reason could get underway. In my second formulation his text was the creation of a precise sociological object and moral reality. And while constituting sociology's first action, the manifesto could then be sup