In this well-written and important book, Hilbert demonstrates how key themes in classical social theory were lost or 'inverted' by Talcott Parsons. Hilbert goes on to show how Garfinkel's 'Studies in Ethnomethodology' (1967), and related work by other early ethnomethodologists generated a body of knowledge regarding actual social practices that stood Parsons on his head, thereby unintentionally 'recovering' some of the key insights lost to American Sociology through Parson's interpretation of Durkheim and Weber. A thought-provoking book whose insights can fuel further empirical work explicating the actual processes of the social world.

In this well-written and important book, Hilbert demonstrates how key themes in classical social theory were lost or 'inverted' by Talcott Parsons. Hilbert goes on to show how Garfinkel's 'Studies in Ethnomethodology' (1967), and related work by other early ethnomethodologists generated a body of knowledge regarding actual social practices that stood Parsons on his head, thereby unintentionally 'recovering' some of the key insights lost to American Sociology through Parson's interpretation of Durkheim and Weber. A thought-provoking book whose insights can fuel further empirical work explicating the actual processes of the social world.

This is the best book ever written concerning Emile Durkheim

This landmark volume honors the 100th anniversary of the publication of Emile Durkheim's milestone book, Le Suicide, often described as one of the three most important works ever written in the social sciences. Lester and the 16 contributors evaluate and reassess the great French sociologist's contributions to social and behavioral science in the light of present-day knowledge and assumptions. Readers who wonder whether Durkheim is still relevant today, whether his work has stood the test of time, will not want to miss this centennial treasury.

CONTENTS:

Preface (1) Suicide and Social Theory (2) Was Durkheim Right? A Critical Survey of the Empirical Literature (3) Durkheim's Heavy Hand in the Sociological Study of Suicide (4) Who Committed Suicide? (5) Missing Features in Durkheim's Theory of Suicide (6) Durkheim and the Macrosociological Study of Suicide (7) "Suicide and the Birth Rate": A Translation and Commentary (8) Durkheim and the Immunity of Women to (9) Applying Durkheim's Typology to Individual Suicides (10) Reformulating Durkheim: 100 Years Later (11) Self-Harm During the Nineteenth Century (12) Bringing Durkheim into the Twenty-first (13) Durkheim's Suicide Theory: Its Applicability to Native Americans (14) A Random Walk Hypothesis for Durkheim's Theory of Suicide

Durkheim sometimes gets a bad rap for his politics, but this is a good book that laid the foundations for much of the sociological work that has followed it. Using the case study example of suicide rates, Durkheim undertakes to show that social structure has a profound and powerful influence on almost everything that individuals do. While the translation is sometimes awkward, Durkheim's work is impressive in its methods, ambitions, and execution. I'd recommend this book to anyone interested in the hstory of sociology or just the power of social structure.

Emile Durkheim's classic work tells us more than just details about suicide. Studying a powerfully individual phenomenon from a sociological perspective was, in its own right, an impressive undertaking. But what interests me more for sociology of media is the way Durkheim handled statistics. In the first chapter, he gives a series of examples that illustrate the danger in placing too much unexamined value in numerical data. He shows first that married people commit suicide more than singles, but then notes that single people include children who are unlikely to commit suicide. Therefore this data does not necessarily indicate a causal relationship between marriage and suicide. He adjusts the data, taking only people of marriage age and computes the data again. This time, single people commit suicide more than married people. However, Durkheim then notes that single people will automatically include a larger portion of mentally or physically defunct people. He therefore concludes that there is not sufficient data to make a conclusion about a causal relationship between suicide and marital status. This is really little more than mental exercise, but it is a critical one for any one employing survey methods and statistical analysis. The researcher must be vigilant in analyzing data to ensure avoiding errors in logic.
Durkheim's study in sociology contributes much more than this detail to the social sciences, but for my purposes of analyzing the sociology of media, this is the most critical point.

Emile Durkheim is called a Father of Sociology, and rightly so. He was the first man to work on all of the problems and issues, unresolved by other known sciences at the time ( in 19-century), to combine many of the already known scientific methods in one, and to call it sociology. Surely, there were other theorists, his contemporaries, who were starting to wander in the same direction at the same time with Durkheim, but he was the one, who put his own and other people's theories to practice. That is what "Suicide" is all about: gathering data and putting it to test with the theory (suicide, being the subject of the study in this case, of course). The best part about Durkheim's work presented in "Suicide" is that it is still an incredibly potent and groundbreaking manuscript. One, who reads it today, can't help but notice that human nature and human problems have largely remained the same: they are universal and ageless and they still need to be studied by competent sociologists.

I'm quite surprised this hasn't been reviewed yet; it's a wonderful book. Likely not for undergrads, Giddens is able to tie together in novel ways some of the key concepts that connect the writings of Marx, Weber and Durkheim. A good deal of the book summarizes the key writings of each author-- which is useful in itself-- and supports much of the summary material with compelling quotes and citations of both the author in question, as well as others who have done secondary analyses. Giddens also devotes a few chapters to analyzing the three authors in comparison, and spends a good deal of time teasing out differences between the three that were not, for me at least, apparent right away. In other words, a solid and original analysis. Not five stars because there was less on similarities of thought between the authors than I would have liked to have seen (and no explicit comparative analysis of Weber and Durkheim, only Marx vis-a-vis the other two), but this is probably due to the fact that Marx, Weber and Durkheim diverge in so many fundamental ways. Nevertheless, truly a must read for those who want to begin to get a grip on classical western social theory in a more sophisticated fashion than what most textbooks (which this is not) might have to offer. Get it, because if it's this old and still in print in the academic world, there's a reason for it...

Giddens is the most well-known British social scientist after Keynes and one of three masters in sociology with Bourdieu and Habermas. This book has been widely used as textbook in classes on the history of sociology, while his more recent book, ¡®Introduction to Sociology¡¯ ahs occupied most introductory classes of sociology.
1. Giddens might be the best and deepest understander of three father of sociology. The prestige and appeal of his structuration theory might be rooted in that mastery. Before proposed the outline of structuration theory in ¡®New Rules of Sociological Method¡¯, he spent about ten years in digging into three founders: Marx, Weber, and Durkheim. This book is the fruit of that effort.
Unlike usual textbook, this book us not simple introduction to classical theorists. The need to read classics lies in the problem sociology poses to itself: ¡®what is the modernity?¡¯ Whereas other sister disciplines pose somewhat narrower problems-capitalism for economics, democracy for political sciences- sociology questions the modernity itself. That¡¯s the very problem three fathers posed over a century ago. But still we question the same problem in the way they set. So we should always return to classics when meeting the fundamental problem.
2. The style of this book is clear, easy-to-follow, and jargon-free enough to be used in undergraduate introductory class. But it doesn¡¯t mean that there is no depth in this book. Giddens argues that thoughts of Weber and Durkheim should be understood as the reaction to Marx. His emphasis is convincing and offers a good standpoint to look up three fathers as a whole. Such a point is invaluable to beginners. Moreover, his interpretations are opposite to conventional wisdom, with solid grounds. He contends that there is no discontinuity between young Marx and late Marx, against humanist views like Frankfurt school¡¯s and structuralist exposition like Althusser¡¯s; there is no inconsistency I Weber. He was always a radical neo-Kantian; the relationship of Weber and Marx should be seen as creative tension rather than antagonism; Durkheim¡¯s point lies in not primarily in ¡®the problem of order¡¯ but in the changing nature of order in the context of social development.

Well, to sort of disagree with the previous review, I feel that this book is great for Undergrads! I, myself had the opportunity to read this book in a social theory class and have since relied upon Giddens excellent analysis of these theorists! It really helped me grasp the detailed (and often times confusing) ideas and theories of the classical theorists. After reading the book, I was able to more fully understand the actual works of these individuals. I use this book as reference guide to refer back to what Marx, Durkheim and Max Weber said.

A classic in many ways, the Division of Labor is a great starting point for sociology - not because it's terribly sexy or interesting or even correct, but because it begins to lay out what sociology can do.

... The Halls translation is quite a good one. If we examine the Halls text and compare it to the "revisions" that the reviewer has posed, we find that the differences are not merely aesthetic, they are substantive. They change the meaning of the sentence, and therefore the nature and meaning of Durkheim's argument.

I think that this Durkheim's best work. As a warning, it is not easy; perhaps this is where the difficulty with the translation lies. But for anyone interested in sociological theory, this book is essential reading. The translation is the best out there.

... The Coser edition of THE DIVISION OF LABOUR is commonly regarded as the best english translation edition.

If you are interested in classic sociological theory, you must read Durkheim...but always with the understanding that we have come a long way since 1912. The fundamental assumption upon which Durkheim's work is based, that aboriginal practices are religion at its most basic and primitive, is no longer accepted as necessarily true. And it definitely cannot be assumed that practices that can be observed today mirror practices from centuries ago, as it is the nature of social practices to adopt with fluidity to changing times and cultures. It is important to recognize Durkheim's role in beginning the dialogue, but it is also important to see the flaws in his work.

This book is a sociological text written by Durkheim. One of the forefathers of Sociology, he believed that to study sociology you must identify social phenomena and then trace it to its origins to see how it came about. This for Durkheim was the only way to understand society.

In this book he examines the origins of religion. He explains that religion develops from the collective feelings of security we gain from living in a group, and these feelings are very powerful and important to us. However, early tribes passed these feelings onto which ever object they were close to at the time of experiencing the emotions, or the most frequent object in their area. The object could include a plant, vegetable or an animal, which would then be represented in a carving of stone or wood and then worshipped. This for Durkheim is the beginning of totemism, the first religion.

He follows on to discuss how our first religion gave us an understanding of the world around us, our conception of space and time. For Durkheim 'the framework of our intelligence' is made up of the concepts of space, time, numbers and our existence, and they were born 'in religion'.

Durkheim's writing is suprisingly easy to read and very enjoyable. His examination of early societies gives much insight into their lives and how they understood the world to be. For anybody studying Durkheim, this book is a good topic area to concentrate on. However, for anybody interested in theology or in early societies, it is a fascinating read. I read this book as part of my degree course and, although I borrowed it from the library, even after my course has ended I am now buying my own copy to reread.

I recommend this book to a wide range of readers, not only those interested in sociology. Read it, you'll be suprised!

Durkheim was not as scientific (or as sociological, or even as valid) as he might have been, but that matters little. He helped start the discipline, and the rest of us have had a century to make advances. This is where to see it just beginning to take form.

WHENEVER YOU LIST COLLECTED WRITINGS or ESSAYS, YOU SHOULD LIST THE *CONTENTS* OF THE BOOK, so that buyers can compare other published collections of the same author's work. I tried to enter this in the CORRECTIONS, but the format was so rigid I couldn't just comment (why don't you change that?), and this was the only way I could see to get a message to you. Thank you.

Voltaire (1694-1778)- glamorous, irreverent, immensely successful in his time - was one of the most prolific writers who ever lived: His collected works comprise 50 volumes. In order to get to know this most famous writer of the Enlightenment one needs a guide who picks examples from this immense body of work. Today Voltaire's wonderful little novel "Candide" tends to overshadow the rest of his literary activity, and in my opinion that is a great pity. This selection will introduce you to the Voltaire I love best: The witty philosopher of common sense and tolerance. In his essays he manages to express the ideas of the enlightenment in an elegant clarity which is unsurpassed in any literature. - Don't let others tell you who Voltaire is; feel the passion and the wisdom of one of the greatest writers ever.

I think this book gives a very good account of Voltaire's life and offers many an insight into the writer's views on, notably, the Britons. It's -to say the least - amusing to view seventeenth-century English society through the eyes of an eminent French intellectual.