Introduction: Division of Labour in Sociology

The division of labour refers to the way tasks in a society are divided among individuals or groups. While both Marx and Durkheim addressed this concept, they did so from very different perspectives—Marx from a conflict-based, economic angle, and Durkheim from a functionalist, social cohesion viewpoint.

---

Karl Marx: Division of Labour as a Source of Alienation and Exploitation

1. Division of Labour under Capitalism

• For Marx, the division of labour is closely tied to economic structures.
• In capitalist societies, labour is divided for the sake of efficiency and profit, but alienates the worker from:
  • The product (they don’t own what they produce)
  • The process (they don’t control how they work)
  • Other workers (competition replaces cooperation)
  • Their human potential (work becomes mechanical)

2. Alienation

• Division of labour dehumanizes the worker, reducing them to a cog in the machine.
• The worker becomes estranged from their true self and from fellow humans.

3. Class Conflict

• The division of labour reflects and reinforces the class structure:
  • Bourgeoisie: Own the means of production.
  • Proletariat: Perform specialized, repetitive tasks but don’t share in the benefits.
• It is a tool of domination, not integration.

4. Historical Materialism

• The nature of division of labour evolves through modes of production:
  • Feudalism → Capitalism → Socialism
• Capitalism, despite its efficiency, intensifies inequality, which will eventually lead to revolution and a classless society.

---

Emile Durkheim: Division of Labour as a Source of Social Integration

1. Moral Basis of Division of Labour

• Durkheim saw division of labour as a moral phenomenon that contributes to social cohesion.
• It creates interdependence among individuals in modern societies, helping maintain order.

2. Types of Solidarity

• He categorized societies based on the type of solidarity they exhibit:
  • Mechanical Solidarity: Found in traditional societies. Based on similarity of tasks and values. Low division of labour.
  • Organic Solidarity: Found in modern societies. Based on difference and interdependence. High division of labour.

3. Anomie

• When division of labour becomes poorly regulated, it can lead to anomie (normlessness).
• People lose a sense of belonging or moral guidance due to rapid changes or excessive specialization.

4. Normal vs. Pathological

• Division of labour is normal and beneficial if properly regulated.
• But it can become pathological when it:
  • Doesn’t lead to solidarity
  • Becomes forced or exploitative
  • Lacks moral integration

---

Key Points of Contrast

Aspect	Karl Marx	Emile Durkheim
Perspective	Conflict theory (economic/materialist)	Functionalist (moral/social cohesion)
Function of Division of Labour	Tool for capitalist exploitation	Means of creating social integration
View on Specialization	Alienating, dehumanizing	Necessary for modern society, if moral
Main Concern	Class conflict and inequality	Social order and cohesion
Result of Division of Labour	Class polarization and revolution	Interdependence and organic solidarity
Conceptual Tool	Historical materialism, class struggle	Social facts, types of solidarity
Pathological Outcome	Exploitation and alienation	Anomie (normlessness)
Solution	Abolish capitalism, classless society	Better moral regulation of labour

---

Conclusion

• Marx critiqued division of labour as a tool of capitalist exploitation, leading to class conflict and alienation.
• Durkheim, on the other hand, viewed division of labour as a way to bind individuals together in complex societies through organic solidarity.
• While Marx focused on the material base and economic relations, Durkheim emphasized the moral and normative order that holds society together.

---

Summary Table

Feature	Karl Marx	Emile Durkheim
Theoretical Lens	Conflict, materialist	Functionalist, moral
Core Theme	Division of labour = exploitation	Division of labour = cohesion
View on Society	Dominated by economic forces	Held together by collective consciousness
Solidarity Type	Not discussed explicitly	Mechanical vs. Organic
Alienation	Central problem of labour	Not central, but acknowledges dysfunction
Anomie	Not emphasized	Key pathology of modern labour
Solution	Revolution, socialism	Moral regulation of labour