University of Toronto: Scarborough Campus

A Modern Morality In
Light Of Traditional
Ethics
Exploring Webers and Durkheims Understanding of Morality
Afeefah Ally
998985479
SOCB43H3
A l l y | 1

A Modern Morality in Light of Traditional Ethics
Sociologists face the predicament of having to navigate countless perspectives in order to
direct their developing understanding of morality as well as their understanding for the obligations
of a sociologists in a modern, constantly evolving context. However, it is by critically examining,
comparing and contrasting these existing frameworks that sociologists become capable of
developing a richer sense of what methods and systems are most applicable, efficient and relevant.
In their works, both sociological theorists Max Weber and Emile Durkheim recognized that society
requires this overarching framework of morality in order to function effectively. However, while
Durkheim and Weber had differing approaches to sociology and the study of morality, both
theorists nonetheless shared an understanding of the source of morality in traditional societies
although their opinions differed in regards to the changing face of morality in a modern context.
The theorists differing approaches to sociology is evident in their understanding of morality
and ethics and also in regards to the aspects they chose to focus on. On one hand, utilizing a
positivistic approach to sociology, meant that Durkheim mainly focused on concrete facts or social
facts that could be observed and measured in his examination of morality.
1
As a result, it can be
argued that he looks at morality through these social facts that are not physical nor subject to human
desires
2
but instead describe every way of acting, fixed or not
3
which are capable of exercising
on the individual an external constraint.
4
Specifically, for Durkheim, morality refers to an
individuals duties to society
5
and for these reasons he examines the concept of morality through

1
Daniel Silver. "Emile Durkheim" SOCB43H3: Sociological Theory. (Toronto: University of Toronto Scarborough, 2014) Lecture:
02/06/2014
2
Daniel Silver. "Emile Durkheim" SOCB43H3: Sociological Theory. (Toronto: University of Toronto Scarborough, 2014) Lecture:
02/06/2014
3
Emile Durkheim. The Rules of the Sociological Method. (New York: Free Press, 1982.) 59.
4
Durkheim: The Rules of the Sociological Method, 59.
5
Emile Durkheim. The Division of Labor in Society. (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2014.) 311.
A l l y | 2

social solidarity. In essence, for Durkheim, the characteristic of moral rules is that they enunciate
the basic conditions of social solidarity.
6

Meanwhile, Weber adopted a Verstehen approach to sociology,
7
thus focusing on the
interpretative aspects of morality. In essence, his focus was not on institutions but rather the
individual and the subjective meaning they attach to their actions.
8
Consequently, Weber examined
morality by attempting to understand the actions of people in fixed groups by reconstructing the
values, traditions, interests, and emotions within which they live

in order to understand how
subjective meaning is formulated through action by scrutinizing individual motivations that
stimulate individuals to assess the relevance of their environment and then organize their behavior
accordingly.
9
Furthermore, he ultimately understood that social action could not be understood,
described, or analyzed without reference to their subjective meaning, the morals that inspire action.
As a result, Weber developed an understanding of morality that encompassed a role for society, as a
symbol of consensus, to function at a sociological, psychological, and biological level while
encouraging people to believe in a unified moral world. Consequently, he examines morality
through assessing the forms of authority established in various societies.
First and foremost, despite their different approaches to understanding sociology and
specifically morality, both theorists understood that traditions and customs played an important role
in the morals and ethics found in traditional societies which often revolved around both written laws
as well as unwritten customs. On one hand, Durkheim understood that one form of solidarity that
served as a moral guideline predominantly in traditional societies was mechanical solidarity which

6
Durkheim. The Division of Labor in Society, 310.
7
Daniel Silver. "Max Weber" SOCB43H3: Sociological Theory. (Toronto: University of Toronto Scarborough, 2014) Lecture:
01/16/2014
8
Daniel Silver. "Max Weber" SOCB43H3: Sociological Theory. (Toronto: University of Toronto Scarborough, 2014) Lecture:
01/16/2014
9
Max Weber. Max Weber: Readings and Commentary on Modernity. (Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2005). XXIV.
A l l y | 3

is based upon people being similar to one another.
10
These societies that function based on
mechanical solidarity are often small scale and people in them often share the same religion,
ethnicity and even work. Consequently, recognizing that they have a lot in common and knowing
that they think the same often results in them generally trusting each other.
11

Furthermore, Durkheim explains that traditional societies are also very often simplistic
societies that are based on shared opinions, values, expectations and responsibilities. Consequently,
a social consequence of this communal understanding established in traditional societies is a shared
collective conscience which can be defined as the totality of beliefs and sentiments common to
average citizens of the same society which ultimately form a determinate system which has its
own life.
12
In other words, it is the collection of beliefs, ideas that are shared by everyone within a
society.
13
As a result of this resemblance amongst the citizens of societies with mechanical
solidarity, there is the creation of the collective conscience which serves to restricts any act which
infringes the collective moral beliefs and guidelines by exercising over the conduct of
citizensthe special punishments it has at its disposal.
14

Meanwhile, in his works, Weber understood that in pre-modern societies, traditional
authority was a form of dominate leadership in which the authority of a body or a ruling regime was
essentially connected to both tradition and custom. In essence, Weber explains that in these
societies, the obligation of obedience is a matter of personal loyalty within the area of accustomed
obligations.
15
Hence, this form of legitimate rule, like mechanical solidarity, is occupied with how
political order can be maintained by the constant reference to customs, traditions and conventions.

10
Daniel Silver. "Emile Durkheim" SOCB43H3: Sociological Theory. (Toronto: University of Toronto Scarborough, 2014)
Lecture: 02/06/2014
11
Daniel Silver. "Emile Durkheim" SOCB43H3: Sociological Theory. (Toronto: University of Toronto Scarborough, 2014)
Lecture: 02/06/2014
12
Durkheim: The Division of Labor in Society, 63.
13
Daniel Silver. "Emile Durkheim" SOCB43H3: Sociological Theory. (Toronto: University of Toronto Scarborough, 2014)
Lecture: 02/13/2014
14
Durkheim: The Rules of the Sociological Method, 51.
15
Weber: Max Weber - Readings and Commentary on Modernity, 193.
A l l y | 4

Moreover, as Weber explains, this brand of authority relies on an established belief in the sanctity
of immemorial traditions and the legitimacy of those exercising authority under rule.
16

Consequently, those in a traditional authority position hold the authority to both formally and
informally outline the rules of behavior that are expected in the society.
In addition, Weber reiterates that traditions and customs found in a traditional authority such
as marriage rituals, do not in fact need to come from a particular individual or group but instead can
be implemented using the same social forces that Durkheim dubbed the collective conscience. As
Weber explains, the validity of a power to command can also rest upon the sacredness of tradition
such as what is customary and has always been so.
17
Accordingly, unspoken rules continue to be
reinforced by the collective conscience as a result of the status of traditional authority that they hold
in a traditional society.
However, both Weber and Durkheim agreed that these forms of traditional morality were
waning as the dynamics of societies changed resulting in very different moral guidelines when
examining morality in a modern context. For Durkheim, that meant that the development of the
division of labor resulted in an evolution in social solidarity thus giving rise to organic solidarity as
the new foundation of moral order.
18
Durkheim explained that societies characterized by organic
solidarity are consequently more secular and individualistic as organic solidarity enforces complex
ideologies and principles on individuals. However, while encouraging a high level of
interdependence, societies in which organic solidarity is evident, also grants people more liberty in
comparison to the dependencies and bonds of traditional societies.
Meanwhile, Weber notes that in modern society, there has been a significant and apparent
shift from traditional authority. He attributes this change to the rise of rational-legal authority which

16
Weber: Max Weber - Readings and Commentary on Modernity, 175.
17
Weber: Max Weber - Readings and Commentary on Modernity, 190.
18
Durkheim: The Division of Labor in Society, 312.
A l l y | 5

is ultimately concerned with how the legitimacy of a political order is judged in the eyes of the
population. For all intents and purposes, Weber explains that this form of authority rests on a belief
in the legality of enacted order
19
as well as the right of that elevated to authority under such rules
to issue directives,
20
rather than upon the legitimacy of traditions established in the past.
Consequently, it can be understood that rational legal authority is in essence a legally established
impersonal order
21
for making decisions with its validity being preserved by virtue of the formal
legality of their commands but contained by the scope of authority of the office.
22
However, this
legal code within rational legal authority is in effect based upon peoples interactions with each
other in which they create and hold expectations of each persons behavior, thus making these
expectations a form of untraditional morality. Consequently this morality in turn puts pressure on
people to behave in certain ways which in due course are often codified as legal rules.
In examining these two frameworks of morality as detailed by both Durkheim and Weber,
Durkheim, despite fearing that the traditional basis of morality and interconnectivity were
collapsing, nonetheless held optimistic views in regards to the individuality and liberty found in
modern society. Conversely, Weber viewed modern society quite differently despite sharing many
of the same thoughts with Durkheim. With the rationalization of many aspects of life such as
morality as seen through the examination of authority, Weber demonstrates that this rationalization
has constrained and constricted peoples autonomy as they become continually more bound by legal
stipulations.
Furthermore, in light of this examination of solidarity, Durkheim demonstrates the belief
that morality is essentially part of the fabric of society that man is only a moral being because he

19
Weber: Max Weber - Readings and Commentary on Modernity, 192.
20
Weber: Max Weber - Readings and Commentary on Modernity, 175.
21
Weber: Max Weber - Readings and Commentary on Modernity, 193.
22
Weber: Max Weber - Readings and Commentary on Modernity, 193.
A l l y | 6

lives in society.
23
Despite the form of solidarity that exists, it is essentially woven into the
behaviour of those living in the social orders he defines. However, in contrast to Weber, Durkheim
appears to be uninterested in detailing how people should obey these moral laws and principles.
Meanwhile, Weber examines morality by scrutinizing the manner by which individuals in a
particular society obey, follow and give their assent to political authorities. Consequently, he views
morality as coming from social regulation which Weber argues is determined by the brand of
authority created by a legitimate power, instead of social laws and principles. Accordingly, Webers
focus on this understanding of morality results in him concentrating on the historical emergence of
social regulation in lieu of established social laws. Thus, while the two theorists share the opinion
that morality in the past was heavily influenced by traditions in customs in the past, their different
approaches in approaching sociology as well as their different approaches when examining morality
in a sociological context resulted in them coming to very different conclusions,
In sum, by critically examining, comparing and contrasting these existing frameworks,
sociologists can develop a richer sense of what methods and systems are most applicable, efficient
and relevant in a modern context as well as how to approach the question of morality from a
sociological perspective. When examining Durkheims and Webers thoughts on morality it is
evident that they did in fact share many views. Nevertheless, their approach to sociology, their
ultimate understanding of morality and manners of examining morality has resulted in the two
theorists presenting very different views on the topic. Consequently, their views on the role of
sociology and by extension sociologists in regards to morality contrasts with each other. On one
hand, Durkheim focused on how societies could maintain their integrity and coherence in
contemporary times. Concerned chiefly with the objectivity of the sociologist, Durkheim

23
Durkheim: The Division of Labor in Society, 311.
A l l y | 7

emphasized that observation must be both impersonal as well as impartial and thus must examine
the facts of morality.
Meanwhile, Weber is explicit in the role that sociologists must take when examining
morality. First of all, according to Weber, social sciences cannot be perceived as empowered to
prescribe ethical values.
24
In Webers opinion, science is rather entrusted with the capacity to
elevate decision-making
25
by examining an individuals conscience and values such as by
examining authority. However, Weber emphasizes that science cannot and must not inform us how
we should live.
26
Instead, Weber argues that philosophies of moral responsibility can only be
developed when individuals are confronted repeatedly with the necessity of making decisions for
themselves.
27
Consequently, Weber concludes that the tasks of sociology in the modern epoch
should remain limited to calculating external objects as well as mans activities
28
and seeking
clarity in respect to the unintended consequences of action.
In conclusion, Durkheim and Weber both described methods of examining morality in the
past as well as the present. The two theorists recognized that traditions and customs played a
substantial role in the creation of moral precepts in the past but with the evolution of society this has
undoubtedly changed resulting in altered guidelines for morality. As a result of their differing
approaches to sociology, however, their understanding of modern morality was thus dissimilar and
is reflected in their understanding of the role of sociology with regards to morality in a modern
context. Nevertheless, it is by examining both views that sociologists can come to a better
understanding of the role of sociology today despite the predicament of having to navigate countless
perspectives in order to direct their developing understanding of morality.
Works Cited

24
Weber: Max Weber - Readings and Commentary on Modernity, 318.
25
Weber: Max Weber - Readings and Commentary on Modernity, 318.
26
Weber: Max Weber - Readings and Commentary on Modernity, 318.
27
Weber: Max Weber - Readings and Commentary on Modernity, 318.
28
Weber: Max Weber - Readings and Commentary on Modernity, 318.
A l l y | 8

Durkheim, mile. The Rules of the Sociological Method, (Ed. by Steven Lukes; trans. By
W.D. Halls). New York: Free Press, 1982, pp. 50-59.
Durkheim, mile. The Division of Labor in Society, (Ed. by Steven Lukes; trans. By W.D.
Halls). New York: Simon and Schuster, 2014. Print.
Silver, Daniel. "Emile Durkheim." SOCB43H3: Sociological Theory. University of Toronto
(Scarborough), Toronto. 06 Feb. 2014.
Silver, Daniel. "Emile Durkheim." SOCB43H3: Sociological Theory. University of Toronto
(Scarborough), Toronto. 13 Feb. 2014.
Silver, Daniel. "Max Weber." SOCB43H3: Sociological Theory. University of Toronto
(Scarborough), Toronto. 16 Jan. 2014.
Weber, Max. Max Weber: Readings and Commentary on Modernity. Ed. Stephen Kalberg.
Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub., 2005. Print.