In defence of Durkheim: sociology, the sacred and 'society'

Defends Emile Durkheim's conception of society against charges of being static & totalizing via four arguments: (1) Durkheim viewed society as a theoretical focus & not an object of study. (2) The dynamism of his conceptualization has been ignored & unsustainably labeled with a "fixed & immutable" character. (3) Durkheim's vision has been understood only narrowly as referring to industrial society when his thought applies much more broadly. (4) Durkheim's relevance remains even in relation to sociological research on phenomena such as networks, flows, & mobilities. It is contended that his notion of the "sacred" demonstrates the fluid & dynamic nature of his conception of society & its value to current inquiry. Differences between Durkheim's earlier & later theorizing are briefly discussed, along with his association of society with the sacred. Contemporary sociology's skeptical take on the idea of society is addressed, highlighting J. Urry's (2000) misrepresentation of Durkheim's thought as static & ahistorical. The dual nature of humans as individuals & social beings is considered, repudiating critiques (eg, Urry) that do not recognize the dynamism of his homo duplex. How current takes (eg, M. Castells [2000]) on social networks in the information age eschew important Durkheimian elements is illustrated along with M. Maffesoli's (1996) more harmonious view, which expresses the sacred facets of social organization. 61 References. J. Zendejas