Contrast Durkheim’s theory of the division of labour with that of Marx Both Marx and Durkheim dealt with the issue of division of labour. However, their approaches to the issue differ. Marx considers that division of labour tends to bring about more output. Durkheim on the other hand considers that there is a greater function in the division of labour than just improvement of productivity. For him, division of labour has a social function, that of creating the sense of solidarity among persons. According to Gilman, women have a lesser representation in the work place, especially in the top positions, relative to their male counterparts. Over the years, women have had more representation in work places, but this has not reached equal levels. This section attempts to establish the best steps towards equality within the labor force. Division of Labor in Marx and Durkheim
As already indicated, Durkheim and Marx differ in many ways in their approach to the issue of division of labor. The difference is especially seen in their understanding of the core function of division of labor. Durkheim was of the view that the greatest significance in the division of labor was the social function of creating unity (Gianfranco, 2000). Durkheim understood himself as having gone against his contemporary and past economists with regard to their understanding of the issue. They saw the primary role of division of labor as having been the increase of production levels. For Durkheim however, increase in the levels of production does happen with a proper division of labor, but it is not the primary function or reason for division. It comes only as a consequence of the division. Marx on the other hand seems to have concurred with the traditional understanding of the economists, that the main reason for the division of labor was the need for increased productivity (Marx, 1964). For Marx, a comparison between the family structure, where roles were divided within these small units, as...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document