The canonical limits of Durkheim's first classic

Abstract

A classic text is not always canonized. Canonical texts are frequently anything but classics. Durkheim's Division of Labor in Societyis an instance of the former; his Rules of Sociological Methodof the latter. Both books are based on errors of fact and method. Division of Laborwas so intentionally the classical theory of modern divided societies that Durkheim, son of generations of rabbis, totally misrepresented the facts of Ancient Israel. In Rules,Durkheim was so intent on writing the canonical text of sociology's methods that he stipulated rules that even he (in Suicide) could not use. Durkheim was thus a giant of the sociological past because,not in spite of, his errors. He erred because he dared to think seriously about the moral issues of his time. Hence, the ironic fate of Durkheim's sociology—it led in two different directions. From Rulesand Suicidecame modern empirical sociology. From Elementary Formscame all the antimodernists—beginning with Levi-Strauss, and from him, Derrida and the others—who became, among other things, the most articulate critics of the sociology Durkheim helped invent. Such is the genius of classic, if not canonical, authors like Durkheim.