Mechanical Solidarity and Organic Solidarity - Assignment Example

? Lecturer: Analysis of Study on Mechanical Solidarity and Organic Solidarity Introduction Human beings exhibit different characteristics in life. These are influence by the levels of pleasure that are obtained from engaging in these activities. Many more find themselves engaging in different social activities at a given time, often multi-tasking in whatever they are doing. Given the same or a similar atmosphere, the activities are bound to be equally similar (Lenhard, 2011, p. 2). For instance, in a stadium where fans are watching some football, there are bound to be many more activities going on such as chatting on the mobile phones, making phone calls, talking about the history of the teams and at the same time watching the football match. A different social setting would have a different set of social activities. To this end, there is some form of cohesion or solidarity in these groups or societies (Andersen & Taylor, 2012, p. 101). Explanation of Mechanical and Organic Solidarity Solidarity from the social scene refers to a form of integration at a given level and type, usually in reference to a group of people or society and their immediate neighbors. The social relations and ties in a society are the binding factors that bring cohesion to the activities that happen in it (Andersen & Taylor, 2012, p. 103). Solidarity does not happen in the broad spectrum context but is specified by the factors that describe the society. Mechanical solidarity therefore is a kind of social cohesion that bases its foundation on likeness and similarities that exist in a society. This is based mostly on the culture of the people defined by the rituals and routines. Organic society is far much devoid of the natural culture but id dependent on advanced societal norms such as those found in industrial societies (Lenhard, 2011, p. 4). Individuals in this society have values and interests that are different but find themselves engaging in some similar activities. Such would occur in a social environment like a relaxation park or place or work. Explanation of the Case In reference to the case that was given therefore, there is need to analyze it by first defining all the components of the settings given in terms of the people, activities and the general setting. There are two groups identified in the cases covered in the field. Of the two groups in the analysis, there are several traits that are going on. In the context given at the CAB building area, there seems to be a social area or relaxation zone. There are six members in the first group. The activities involve talking on phone (1st member), texting (2nd member), and chatting (3rd member). The rest of the members are either just talking, not on phone or looking at the other people and the activities going on at the place. The second group of people is not doing much but taking coffee and talking off as well as a phone being seen just once. The second day saw a big group of people. The activities involve reading, texting, just gazing around and lining up for coffee. There are however more than seven groups of people under focus. Analysis of the Case There are so many similarities in the way the people under observation are behaving especially in respect to the use of the modern electronic gadgets. The reasons for being at the place remain the cause of concern. Being a coffee place, it can be assumed that most of the people are here for a cup of coffee as seen in the second day observations. According to Lenhard (2011), there is a close proximity to things that happen to people in a similar environment. In the first case as stipulated by group 1, the people are set in different contexts and the presence of one person at the place is not dependent on the other person. The aim here was to eat and drink as he and his accomplices left after sometime. Therefore, there are several activities that were going on at this point. Texting is illustrative of organic solidarity that was going on. There is no indication that any of the first six people were communicating on phone to each other but there was some conventional conversation amongst them. Durkheim categorically defines this type of sharing as ‘cohesive sharing to meet the society’s social needs’ (Andersen & Taylor, 2012, p. 102). This first group is not entirely here to talk or chat with the other third persons on phone but the dynamic societal need to be satisfied is therefore the factor that creates the cohesion in sharing the activities going on. He further asserts that human beings are always in some form of conversations either with themselves or with other people. However, what they converse is dependent on the societal factors that combine them (Lenhard, 2011, p. 2). In this case, a case of organic solidarity is dominant over the case of mechanical solidarity. However, there is also a big show of mechanical solidarity in this first case analysis. It is seen that the behaviors being exhibited are all dependent on the available and existing social system. And the social system here is dictated more by the availability of the mobile phones for either calling or texting. In the second case, there will be a collection of the two ideas in that there are those who are reading, playing and others playing in the same environment. This is typical of solidarity based on mutual understanding between the different present at the place. Durkheim in further makes an analytical view of his provisions in the two forms of solidarity. He says that individuals exhibiting cohesion and integration in mechanical solidarity are bound by some factors amongst them educational, religious and general lifestyle. From the group two cases, the point of commonality tends to lie in the fact that most of the people are bound by educational matters in the society. The educational matters are all embroiled in the fact that these people attend some school or college within and those that are carrying laptops are into some academic work. However, they have a lot of other activities going on including texting, calling, chatting and talking over. This makes the point of combination. Solidarity therefore is not an act of charity but is dictated by circumstantial factors that do exist in the given environments. Pre-industrial societies, according to Taylor’s (2012) views of Durkheim experienced a lot of mechanical solidarity because everything was shaped by culture of the whole society. Mobile phones are typical of the industrial societies; the people are in cohesion over the issues they are talking about. There is a lot of texting, irrespective of the type of person being addressed, reading regardless of the materials being read as well as taking of the coffee for most of the people that are at this place. Further expressions of Durkheim through modern day writers also indicate that solidarity is not necessarily an issue of altruism (Baker, Pulling, Robert McGraw, Dagnone, Diana, & Medves, 2008, p. 375). However, there are usually so many distractions that do happen in social life and these require some form of attention (Lenhard, 2011, p. 6). The phone is maximally used through exploration of all its features by the people but the ringing of the phone can equally not be ignored. The notes on the laptop cannot be ignored as well as the reasons for coming to the CAB building, taking coffee. Therefore, regardless of what the person is doing, the end fact remains that he is doing just one thing but many things that socially come his way. Conclusion The analysis of the situation above and many more are said to be a verification of individualism creation and eradication. The mobile phone for instance is a single gadget with so many uses and these are used to combine two people regardless of what else they were doing. Durkheim asserts that as long as there is a part of the body that remains to be used for any social function during a busy schedule, human beings is able to still utilize it (Andersen & Taylor, 2012, p. 104). This paper has analyzed the fact that human beings are creatures that are able to do several things at the same time. In a group, the type of activity that goes on is determined by the type of existing culture norms. That is why there was the issue of organic and mechanical solidarity. In the analysis therefore, it was very important to put in place an introduction that explained the situation, explanation of the situation and then the analysis as seen above. References Andersen, M. L., & Taylor, H. F. (2012). Sociology: The Essentials. Washington: Cengage Learning. Baker, C., Pulling, C., Robert McGraw, Dagnone, J. D., D. H.-R., & Medves, J. (2008). Simulation in interprofessional education for patient-centred collaborative care. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 64(4), 372-379. Lenhard, J. ( 2011). A Critical Account of Durkheim's Concept of Organic Solidarity. New York: GRIN Verlag. Read More