Durkheim - Organic Solidarity and Contractual Solidarity

Durkheim has written and I am intrigued by the following: "We must indeed not forget that if life is more regulated it is also generally more abundant." Regulated by the number of restitutive laws, or the complexity of these laws, in response to greater social complexities? If I consider what I have experienced in the past 40 years, then I must answer yes to both.

Consider the following: The Iowa Administrative Code Index alone is at present 638 pages; the Code and Index are updated bi-weekly on its website; there is a permanent Administrative Rules Review Committee in the Iowa State legislature; the LSA (Legislative Services Agency) analyzes the fiscal impact of all administrative rules with a potential impact of $100,000 or more; there are uniform rules on agency procedure; and statutes focused on State Sovereignty and Management, Elections and Official Duties, Public Services and Regulation, Public Health, Agriculture, Human Services, Education and Cultural Affairs, Transportation, Local Government, Financial Resources, Natural Resources, Business Entities, Commerce, Property, Judicial Branch and Judicial Proceedings, Criminal Law and Procedures, Mortality Tables, Historical Chronological Outline of Codes and Session Laws, Iowa-Missouri Boundary Compromise, Iowa-Nebraska Boundary Compromise, and Admission of Iowa into the Union statutes providing guidance within the Iowa Administrative Rules section; and another approximately 100 sections governing activities ranging from the Beef Industry to banking, to interior design, to utilities, to real estate, to professional licensing, and many more in the Iowa Administrative Code.

But how does this complexity and great delineation of obligations, and therefore social interaction and relationships, beget greater "life abundance"? Did I just answer my own question, or not? As restitutive law increases, producing more regulation, does it inherently govern as well as increase the number of interactions and relationships, the complexity of these interactions and relationships, and therefore, the types of interactions and relationships, going far beyond the exchange of goods and services? Durkheim suggests that the proliferation of restitutive law in fact "defines and regulates" the "special relationship" between the "different social functions". It appears that Durkheim's theory may have credibility. As persons become more individualized by division of labor, their reliance upon one another increases, reliance has now has evolved to an issue of survival, whether we speak of health care, transportation, child care, shelter (e.g. if a furnace is not maintained by a specialist, death could result), and beyond. These specializations are governed by innumerable restitutive laws. A social network beyond the vocational connectivity between people results, as we now become more involved with one another in a variety of additional roles. How many of us, have been asked to be a part of a Board of Directors, a committee, a fraternal organization, a team, a club, a partnership, or simply invited to an event, etc. as a result of our vocational specialization? All of us have been and will continue to be a part of one another's reality due to the division of labor, the specialization, and the organic solidarity.

Nevertheless, we must also examine the quantitative status of repressive law vis-a-vis restitutive law to come to an accurate conclusion regarding which type may predominantly define and categorize our individual and social reality and type of social solidarity (i.e. of course, mechanical or organic) in our society. I also theorize that each individual is effected differently by her/his environment, and the dominant type of social solidarity may have less or greater impact on each person by virtue of a variety of individualized circumstances. These circumstances include the type of job s/he holds. Yes, the dominant restitutive law environment will impact each person differently, and in broad strokes, may impact those in lesser skilled jobs differently. Of course, these jobs require less specialization. So, logically the impact of an organic environment may have less impact on these persons. This circumstance, along with other variables, may in fact create a greater amount of mechanical solidarity among individuals in this circumstance, with the critical aspect of the collective consciousness coming to the forefront. Accordingly, other variables, all associated with the foundational division of labor, may correlate with a greater collective consciousness and greater mechanical solidarity. Perhaps an alignment of a few or several variables is necessary for the triumph of mechanical over organic in a predominantly organic society. In economically deprived areas, some with a strong allegiance to tradition and organized religion, along with the prerequisite simple division of labor, one might find a mechanical orientation. Of course, the key is, the division of labor. This may not surprise anyone. A simple division of labor circumstance (perhaps isolated in time and location) can be associated with unskilled or under skilled positions, perhaps sporadic employment or unemployment, and low wages. Physical isolation may or may not be a part of the equation, caused by quite a few variables, but reinforced by transportation challenges and diminished access to services and opportunity for change and information. Does this lead to greater isolation, even from those in similar circumstances? In some cases, yes. In others, no. It will depend upon the geographic proximity of "fellow-sufferers". If close by, the social isolation can be diminished within the "fellow-sufferers" domain, but remains vis-a-vis dissimilar groups of persons. This reinforces mechanical solidarity in an organic solidarity environment. If there is commonality in suffering; close geographic proximity; and a slow-changing environment; there is possibly a greater adherence to tradition and a potentially greater reliance upon a greater power that ordains and controls persons' destiny (the locus of control is not within the individual for outside forces have dictated the condition for long periods of time, even generations). Some persons and families may relate to the environment as "caught or stuck" between both worlds, the mechanical and organic, even though there is a dominant type of solidarity that is still creating individuality (organic) and social circles (both types) for all. This "caught or stuck" status is exemplified by a distinct array of coping mechanisms displaying both mechanical and organic solidarity traits that may not be found in the same proportion in other persons. It has been advanced that the importance of relying on others to survive in an organic environment is a critical coping mechanism for all, as a result of the development of the division of labor, specialization, and their by-product, individuality. In contrast, the same holds true in a mechanical solidarity environment, but for different reasons. I advance the thought that in some sectors of a predominantly organic solidarity environment, we will find a greater proportion of mechanical solidarity traits, behaviors, and attitudes. These attitudes and behaviors will be produced in response to a different set of environmental factors that include less reliance on restitutive law given a dearth of complexity in the environment these sectors come into contact. Restitutive law does have some influence in these sectors, but there is simply less of a need for it. These mechanically-based attitudes and behaviors will be reasonable and functional in application, are related to survival (not hyperbole), stem from a localized division of labor factor, are produced independent of the societally-dominant organic forces that may actually be detrimental to these persons if the organic orientation is practiced and accepted; are generational; and are differentially open to change or alteration as practical. With respect to consciousness, for this segment of the population, the ratio of individual consicousness to group or collective consciousness is different that the rest of the population. There is more collective consciousness out of perceived and actual necessity, despite the rest of the population "dancing to the beat of a different drum"; that beat being organic solidarity derived.
Taking a break.