Editing Anomie (section)

== History ==
In 1893, Durkheim introduced the concept of ''anomie'' to describe the mismatch of collective [[guild]] labour to evolving societal needs when the guild was [[homogeneous]] in its constituency. He equated homogeneous (redundant) skills to ''[[mechanical solidarity]]'' whose inertia hindered adaptation. He contrasted this with the [[Self-regulation theory|self-regulating behaviour]] of a [[division of labour]] based on differences in constituency, equated to ''[[organic solidarity]]'', whose lack of inertia made it sensitive to needed changes.

Durkheim observed that the conflict between the evolved organic division of labour and the homogeneous mechanical type was such that one could not exist in the presence of the other.<ref name="quot1">[[Émile Durkheim|Durkheim, Émile]]. [1893] 1964. ''The Division of Labor in Society''. [[Free Press (publisher)|Free Press]].</ref>{{Rp|182–183}} When solidarity is organic, anomie is impossible, as sensitivity to mutual needs promotes evolution in the division of labour:<ref name="quot1" />{{Rp|368–369}}{{blockquote|Producers, being near consumers, can easily reckon the extent of the needs to be satisfied. [[Social equilibrium|Equilibrium]] is established without any trouble and production regulates itself. }}Durkheim contrasted the condition of anomie as being the result of a malfunction of organic solidarity after the transition to mechanical solidarity:<ref name="quot1" />{{Rp|368–369}}

{{blockquote|But on the contrary, if some opaque environment is interposed{{nbsp}}... relations [are] rare, are not repeated enough{{nbsp}}... are too intermittent. Contact is no longer sufficient. The producer can no longer embrace the market at a glance, nor even in thought. He can no longer see its limits, since it is, so to speak limitless. Accordingly, production becomes unbridled and unregulated.|title=|source=}}

Durkheim's use of ''anomie'' was in regards to the phenomenon of [[Industrialisation|industrialization]]—mass-[[regimen]]tation that could not adapt due to its own inertia. More specifically, its resistance to change causes disruptive cycles of [[collective behavior]] (e.g. economics) due to the necessity of a prolonged buildup of sufficient force or momentum to overcome the inertia.

Later in 1897, in his studies of suicide, Durkheim associated ''anomie'' to the influence of a lack of [[Social norm|norms]] or norms that were too rigid. However, such normlessness or norm-rigidity was a ''symptom'' of anomie, caused by the lack of differential adaptation that would enable norms to evolve naturally due to [[Self-regulation theory|self-regulation]], either to develop norms where none existed or to change norms that had become rigid and obsolete. Durkheim found that Protestant communities have noticeably higher suicide rates than Catholic ones, and justified it with individualism and lack of social cohesion prevalent amongst Protestants, creating poorly integrated society and making Protestants less likely to develop close communal ties that would be crucial in times of hardship. Conversely, he states that the Catholic faith binds individuals together and builds strong social ties, decreasing the risk of suicide and alienation. In this, Durkheim argued that religion is much more important than culture in regards to anomic suicide. This allowed Durkheim to successfully tie social cohesion to suicide rates:

{{blockquote|text=If the individual isolates himself, it is because the ties uniting him with others are slackened or broken, because society is not sufficiently integrated at the points where he is in contact with it. These gaps between one and another individual consciousness, estranging them from each other, are authentic results of the weakening of the social fabric.<ref>{{cite book|last=Rose|first=Steve|date=2015|title=Applying Durkheim's Theory of Suicide: A Study of Altruism and Anomie Among Canadian Veterans of Afghanistan|page=49|publisher=Queen’s University|location=Kingston, Ontario|url=https://qspace.library.queensu.ca/bitstream/handle/1974/13511/Rose_Steve_R_201508_PhD.pdf;sequence=1|archive-date=2022-10-22|access-date=2022-10-22|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221022003825/https://qspace.library.queensu.ca/bitstream/handle/1974/13511/Rose_Steve_R_201508_PhD.pdf;sequence=1|url-status=live}}</ref>}}

In 1938, [[Robert K. Merton]] linked ''anomie'' with [[Robert K. Merton#Theory of deviance|''deviance'']], arguing that the discontinuity between [[culture]] and [[Social structure|structure]] have the dysfunctional consequence of leading to deviance within society. He described 5 types of deviance in terms of the acceptance or rejection of [[Goal|social goals]] and the [[Institutionalisation|institutionalized]] means of achieving them.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Merton|first=Robert K.|author-link=Robert K. Merton|date=1938|title=Social Structure and Anomie|journal=American Sociological Review|volume=3|issue=5|pages=672–682|doi=10.2307/2084686|jstor=2084686}}</ref>