Mechanical and Organic Solidarity: One in the Same?

Trying to find a flaw in Emile Durkheim’s research was like examining the fracture lines in a geological sample. You know it’s there, but the definitions are a bit skewed, and detours fill your mind with strife and inquiries. Without the help of Krouber, I would have never had a starting point, and he laid the foundation. Krouber believed Durkheim was a positivist and I firmly believe this notion as well.

Durkheim states, “as long as society is essentially segmental [and solidarity is mechanical] towns do not exist”. I vehemently disagree with this statement. Even if individuals work separately on an occasional basis, it doesn’t necessarily mean a town can’t form. Yet, this statement hardly encompasses Durkheim’s complete view, or separation of societies, based on simple characteristics. Durkheim believes that mechanical solidarity leads to, or is the result of, individualism. Members of the society, therefore, don’t need each other for survival.

He then places Native Americans within this classification, which ultimately perplexed and infuriated me. Native Americans may not have lived in an excepted form of a town, however a reservation, which surrounds a central chief, is the very essence of one. Furthermore, Native Americans hunt as a collective and bring back their kills, which is then divided amongst the people. Can’t a mechanical society form around a central organ, characterized by organic solidarity? Can they do this on their own? Of course they could, but they depend on one another to make the hunt a more sacred experience. Durkheim makes the mechanical classification using no ethnographic analysis.

Durkheim further mentions that “we cannot survive without others”, as our lifeline is based upon the production and reliance on others to produce food, perform certain tasks, and provide us material items. This I do agree with, but why separate mechanical solidarity from organic? All people work separately at some point in their life and their results are presented to a central figure or are performed for a certain purpose. In essence, society is a network of capillaries, connecting to a central organ. All those separate parts act on one another and build upon the reactions to make the organ operate. Can the development of mechanical and organic solidarity only be at the expense of the other? Why separate mechanical solidarity from organic, when societies all operate as living organisms? This question brings up the textual jargon, “social organism”, whereby external forces may lead to homeostasis. Yet, this does not account for conflict which leads to social transformation.

Durkheim doesn’t address origin, but function. He doesn’t answer the question as to why, historically, one society differs from the next, but how it functions and in what way it should be classified. He never mentions conflict or cause, rather comparison of a unit instead of its subunits. Conflict leads to transformation, which leads to classification, eventually giving us an historical basis for comparison. Durkheim never addressed these issues.

Copan Ruins In Honduras

The settlement at Copan is located not far from the borders of Honduras and Guatemala and is believed to exhibit the some of the most amazing ruins of the Mayan occupied territories. Copan achieved its greatest standing during the 5th century under the ruler the Great Lord Quetzal Macaw. The Great Lord was named after two of the most prominent birds in the area and he left a legacy of a settlement that thrived until the 12th century.

What distinguishes Copan from the other pre-Columbian ruins is that the people were not forced to leave by the Spanish. In fact, they appear to have moved before their arrival, at least two years prior to the conquistadors.



There are several theories as to why they left the civilization at Copan, however the most widely accepted belief is that they left because the land was no longer suitable for agriculture.
As for the name, no one really knows if the original settlement had one. However, during the 16th century, the Spanish decided to name it Copan.

Replica of Rosalila Temple 


© xinning

If you happen to travel to the site, it takes several days to walk around the ruins. There are numerous royal homes, servants quarters, religious areas, and middle class dwellings around the site. There is, however, something that lies beneath, buried by the Maya and incredibly well preserved. Under the ground lies the 6th century Rosalila Temple, with the original layers of intricate paint and design.


Source

Like many other pre-Columbian civilizations, there are temples above the ground decorated with carved human faces. The faces are both frightening and humorous, some also taking the form of animals and birds.

Today, the macaws of Copan still inhabitat the ruins, flying around the ancient temples and ruined buildings. Sadly, however, the quetzal is rarely seen due to its endangered status.

Picture source Temple © pirate0007