Introduction…Emile Durkheim, born in the mid-1800s, was a sociologist and philosopher whose ideas are still relevant today. Durkheim combined the theories of past sociologists and philosophers, such as Marx and Comte, to develop his own theories. Many of these theories are still relevant today and can be used to analyze and explain factors in modern societies. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Theory… Similar to Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim believed in the essentialism of functional development. Furthermore, he believed that “In the social productions of their existence, men inevitably enter into indefinite relations…” (Marx [1859]1992:425). Therefore, humans use their extrinsic relationships to work together in society and transform their relationships and resources into materialistic ideas and objects. However, although Durkheim and Marx had similar theories of essentialism, their theories of human nature differed greatly. While Marx believed that “human nature is not a static thing, but varies historically and socially” (Ritzer, 2011:158), Durkheim believed that human beings are strongly influenced and driven by their personal interests, insatiable passions and need of gratification (Ritzer 2011). Durkheim states that there is a constant tension between selfish human nature and the altruistic social consciousness of morality that helps control selfish human nature (Ritzer 2011). Therefore, Marx's theory of human nature states that human nature is not static, while Durkheim's theory of selfish and passionate human nature is natural and static. Combining his theories of essentialism and human nature, Durkheim created many of his theories of society, including social ones. facts and division of labor. Durkheim strongly believed that aspects of society could not be reduced to individual people alone; he thought society should be seen as a whole (Ritzer 2011). Thus he created his idea of ​​social facts. He states: “A social face is any way of acting, fixed or otherwise, capable of exerting an external constraint on the individual; or again, any way of acting that is general in a given society, but at the same time exists in itself independently of its individual manifestations” (Ritzer 2011: 184). Therefore, social facts are viewed at the social level and can be studied and explained by other social facts. Although Durkheim created the idea of ​​both material and immaterial social facts, he focused heavily on non-material ones. Two of Durkheim's nonmaterial social facts that relate to his ideas about human nature include morality and collective conscience (Ritzer 2011). Because Durkheim believed that human nature was driven by self-interest and uncontrollable passions, he believed that “society needed a strong common morality” (Ritzer 2011: 189) to control those passions. Although he argued that society as a whole could not become immoral, he believed that it was in danger of losing its moral strength “if the collective interest of society became nothing more than the sum of its personal interests” (Ritzer 2011: 189) . Therefore, it is imperative that society values ​​morality so that human nature does not override the greater good. Furthermore, Durkheim believed that society needs a collective conscience which is important in societies for societies to have morals, values, and ideas. Collective conscience is defined by Durkheim as “the set of beliefs and feelings common to the average citizen of the same society forms a specific system that has a life of its own” (Durkheim 1893/2011:190). Durkheim believes that this consciousness is important in thedetermine other social facts and create a structure of common beliefs and values ​​in a society (Ritzer 2011). Along with Durkheim's idea of ​​social factors and human nature, he developed a theory of the division of labor. Durkheim's idea of ​​division of labor can be expanded on dynamic density, mechanical solidarity, organic solidarity and how these theories are viewed in modern society. According to Durkheim, as the world evolves, the population grows, therefore the dynamic density grows. He defines dynamic density as “the number of people in a society and the amount of interaction that occurs among them” (Ritzer 195). Furthermore, as the world moved from primitive to modern societies, people moved from mechanical solidarity to organic solidarity (Calhoun 2012). In the past, primitive societies consisted of high collective consciousness and mechanical solidarity due to societies having similar jobs and interests. As time passed and population and dynamic density increased, societies developed organic solidarity, lower collective consciousness, and a greater division of labor due to the fact that with more people comes more ideas and skills (Calhoun 2012) . Therefore, in modern society with lower collective consciousness, division of labor is important as it creates interdependencies between different people and holds society together. However, since the division of labor is a theory invariant with respect to the regulatory framework, to be successful it must follow a precise path. If societies change too quickly, or if external factors disrupt it, an anomie occurs that does not allow the society to function properly (Calhoun 2012). Analysis… Durkheim's theories and ideas, or lack thereof, can be linked to modern educational issues. , race and class. In an article titled “The Decline of the Black Community,” Elijah Anderson states that in the past, black communities were segregated and had their own doctors, lawyers, schools, barbershops, and all other aspects of society. He claims that many of these factors do not exist in today's society, as we have become less segregated. However, segregation between races is still widespread in today's society. For example, schools in urban areas are completely unequal compared to schools in suburban areas. In “The Shame of the Nation: The Restoration of Apartheid Schooling in America,” Jonathon Kozol writes about the inequities found in schools in the New York City area. Kozul spent considerable time visiting and researching New York City schools and schools in surrounding suburbs to demonstrate the amount of inequality observed among these schools (Kozol 2005). One of the biggest inequities between city schools and suburban schools is financial. First, New York City schools don't have enough money to improve their buildings or grounds. In many schools, buildings were observed falling apart (Kozol 2005). For example, in one school, “a stream of water ran down one of the main stairs on a rainy afternoon where green mushroom mold was growing” (Kozul 2005:40-41) and an elementary school “was forced to order that the In the building the windows were not cleaned because the frames were rotten and the glass fell onto the street (Kozol 2005:43). Among these problems were other issues such as leaky ceilings, rooms with no air, no windows, and other unhealthy conditions. Furthermore, despite the growing population of pupils, schools have been forced to remain the same size, as they do not have the money to expand the buildings. This meant that students were crammed into rooms, some without seats, some without windows or air conditioning, and some in buildings that were not.