(CND1b) Études Durkheimiennes: Engagements contemporain II

In recent decades, Durkheimian sociology and social theory have sparked new debates and controversies while informing research on a wide variety of contemporary social phenomena and events. Canadian sociology has contributed to this renewal in important ways in the French and English languages with major contributions on historical context, critical theorizing, and substantive analyses. Sessions organized by the Canadian Network of Durkheimian Studies/ Réseau canadien d'études durkheimienne (CNDS/RCED) consider a range of contributions including: substantive studies (e.g., religion, cultural analysis, social pathology, suicide), critical perspectives (e.g., decolonizing sociology), theoretical research, creative syntheses such as found in Fields and Fields' work on Durkheim and Du Bois in "Racecraft," and historical-contextual work. Presenters include internationally known scholars, graduate students at all levels, and Canadian academics. Tags: Culture, Religion, Théorie

Organizers: Ronjon Paul Datta, University of Windsor, Tara Milbrandt, University of Alberta, William Ramp, University of Lethbridge, Robin Willey, Concordia University; Chair: Ronjon Paul Datta, University of Windsor

Presentations

Paul Carls, Independent

Durkheim as Master of Suspicion

In the 1960s Paul Ricoeur coined the phrase “masters of suspicion” to describe Karl Marx, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Sigmund Freud for their ability to reveal the hidden or repressed meanings or truths located in texts or social and psychological phenomena. Philosophers, theologians, and literary theorists have subsequently applied the term “master of suspicion,” as well as the associated term “hermeneutics of suspicion,” in manifold ways. The concept has become one of philosophy’s recognizable turns of phrase, an “iconic term” that excites imagination and interest in much the same way as Nietzsche’s ‘death of God.’ Ricoeur identifies four aspects that the masters of suspicion have in common: an engagement with religion; their contestation of the primacy of consciousness in the domain of knowledge, which implies a radical critique of the Cartesian cogito and the exposure of false consciousness; the development of a new method of demystification, or a new way to explain consciousness; the destruction of old myths, which implies simultaneously a rebuilding process towards developing a new, more true understanding of reality, a process that involves a liberation from illusion and the expansion of consciousness. Durkheim’s sociological project contains all of these elements: by showing how individuals are socially constructed, including even their ability for logical thought, his work exposes the falsity of the Cartesian cogito and the idea of the independent and autonomous ego; he develops a new sociological method which seeks to unmask the hidden social processes that determine individual thought and behavior; his sociology destroys old ways of thinking, but simultaneously actively rebuilds a new understanding of reality, and seeks to expand consciousness by highlighting how consciousness is shaped by social processes; his work on religion is an exercise in a hermeneutics of suspicion just as radical as that of the other masters of suspicion. This contribution will explain the ways in which Durkheim is truly a master of suspicion in Ricoeur’s sense, but also seeks to understand why Ricoeur did not mention Durkheim. The contribution will thus explore how Durkheim is relevant for hermeneutics, while also exploring facets of his methodology in new ways.

Carlos Fabris, Heidelberg University

Crisis, Critique and Therapy: Durkheim's moral individualism as Zeitdiagnose

Émile Durkheim offers various analyses and normative propositions regarding the transformations experienced in the emergence of modernity, with particular emphasis on its moral dimension. Referring to these broad analyses of a specific period, the genre of "Zeitdiagnose" has recently emerged, especially in the German context. Although their focus is on the present, their discussions can be applied to the analysis of classical texts and their diagnoses. With reference to this literature, we try to explore theoretically the construction of Durkheims diagnoses in their dimensions of crisis, critique, and therapy from a perspective of moral sociology. Furthermore, it is possible to identify the potentialities and limitations of Durkheimian insights in the face of contemporary challenges. To this end, first, the central aspects of the literature on the diagnosis of time were organized, delimiting its elements and its relation to (classical) theory. Second, the different fronts of Durkheims theory were examined in order to understand his formulation of a diagnosis, especially concepts such as morality, pathology and normality, anomie and moral individualism. Third, contemporary debates were compared with the classical formulation, in the sense of an update of Durkheims theory. In this sense we combined a specific literature-oriented interpretation of his work with an in-depth theoretical analysis of the works related to the topic - as well as secondary literature -, in order to finally point out elements of a development of his ideas in contemporary discussions. It is argued that Durkheims diagnosis centers on the concept of moral individualism. This concept displays characteristics of diagnoses, such as generality, public orientation, and normativity. Various moral and ethical concepts from Durkheims work can be combined to construct a comprehensive interpretation of modernity as analyzed and experienced by the author. This text discusses the maintenance of solidarity through the sacredness of the autonomous person as a human ideal. Additionally, it argues that Durkheimian sociology has positive contributions to current discussions, particularly when some of its limitations are reinterpreted and actualized, as exemplified by Hans Joas analyses of sacralization (and its opposite, desacralization) and current postsecular discussions. In the theoretical analysis, we concluded that the centrality of the concept of moral ideal is crucial to link the different analyses of the author, to understand the crises, to justify his critique, and to offer new perspectives based on normative ideals. The erosion of communal solidarity and social bonds after greater social differentiation requires a new common ideal that can transcend the different local orientations with a broader reach in order to avoid anomie. Durkheim argues that moral individualism is the normal state for stabilizing modern society, rather than a pathological one. Many of Durkheims original insights remain valid in contemporary discussions, updated in relation to other theoretical traditions and new empirical evidence. Our goal is to contribute to the discussions of the Durkheim Research Cluster by providing a theoretical analysis of his work and concepts. Furthermore, we will offer a critical perspective on how his ideas can be updated in dialogue with current productions, particularly in the sociology of morality and Zeitdiagnose. In the context of the conference, the concept of shared futures addresses Durkheims dilemma of order and his discussions with conservative ideals and specters that haunted the Third French Republic. Revisiting the classics and their propositions can provide paths for contemplating shared ideals and lives when considering contemporary problems and possibilities.

---

Non-presenting author: Raquel Weiss, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul

Piotr Ahmad, University of British Columbia

Nationalism strikes back. Emile Durkheim, Ukraine 2022 and the political theology of Vladimir Putin.

From the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 to the turmoil caused by the recent assassination of the Sikh nationalist activist Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Canada in June 2023 to the most recent escalation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, current political developments across the globe serve as a powerful warning that we are witnessing a resurgence of ethnic, cultural, and “tribal” nationalism. Liberal democracy has not triumphed. We have not been able to transcend cultural and ethnic nationalism (Smith, 2003). Firstly, grounding my analysis (Smith, 2003) in Emile Durkheim’s notions of religion, ritual, and the totemic principle, I will argue that (especially cultural/tribal) nationalism continues to be a relevant force in contemporary politics precisely because, like religion in Durkheim (1912), it constitutes a really existing, stable and deep social (and moral) force, and speaks to objective human needs (e. g. belonging). My key point here is that nationalism could not be effectively instrumentalized by politicians otherwise, since appeals to it would not resonate with the audiences to whom these appeals are directed. National identity remains an effective tool of political mobilization because it has deeply running social and communal sources, even if we often (as I argue, incorrectly) locate these sources elsewhere (for example in a voluntarist liberal community centered around constitutional values). In the second part of my paper, focusing on the ideas of “the chosen people” and “the 1,000-year/Holy Rus’ and, applying Durkheim’s ideas discussed above, I will discuss how cultural nationalism has underpinned Putin’s “political theology” and Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.