Editing Émile Durkheim (section)

====Suicide====
{{main|Suicide (Durkheim book)}}

In ''Suicide'' (1897), Durkheim explores the differing suicide rates among Protestants and Roman Catholics, arguing that stronger [[social control]] among Roman Catholics results in lower suicide rates. According to Durkheim, Roman Catholic society has normal levels of [[social integration|integration]] while Protestant society has low levels. Overall, Durkheim treated [[suicide]] as a [[social fact]], explaining variations in its rate on a macro level, considering society-scale phenomena such as lack of connections between people (group attachment) and lack of regulations of behavior, rather than individuals' feelings and motivations.<ref name="Calhoun2002-10632" /><ref>{{harvp|Allan|2005|p=131}}</ref>

Durkheim believed there was more to suicide than extremely personal individual life circumstances such as loss of a job, divorce, or bankruptcy. Instead, Durkheim explained suicide as a symptom of collective social deviance, like alcoholism or homicide.<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal |last1=Mueller |first1=Anna S. |last2=Abrutyn |first2=Seth |last3=Pescosolido |first3=Bernice |last4=Diefendorf |first4=Sarah |date=2021 |title=The Social Roots of Suicide: Theorizing How the External Social World Matters to Suicide and Suicide Prevention |journal=Frontiers in Psychology |volume=12 |pages=621569 |doi=10.3389/fpsyg.2021.621569 |issn=1664-1078 |pmc=8044307 |pmid=33868089 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

He created a [[Normative statement|normative theory]] of suicide focusing on the conditions of group life. Proposing four different types of suicide, which include [[Egoism|''egoistic'']], [[Altruism|''altruistic'']], [[Anomie|''anomic'']], and [[Fatalism|''fatalistic'']], Durkheim began his theory by plotting social regulation on the x-axis of his chart, and social integration on the y-axis:<ref name=":3" />

* ''Egoistic suicide'' corresponds to a low level of social integration. When one is not well integrated into a social group it can lead to a feeling that they have not made a difference in anyone's lives. 
* ''Altruistic suicide'' corresponds to too much social integration. This occurs when a group dominates the life of an individual to a degree where they feel meaningless to society. 
* ''Anomic suicide'' occurs when one has an insufficient amount of social regulation. This stems from the sociological term ''anomie'', meaning a sense of aimlessness or despair that arises from the inability to reasonably expect life to be predictable. 
* ''Fatalistic suicide'' results from too much social regulation. An example of this would be when one follows the same routine day after day. This leads to a belief that there is nothing good to look forward to. Durkheim suggested this was the most popular form of suicide for prisoners.

This study has been extensively discussed by later scholars and several major criticisms have emerged. First, Durkheim took most of his data from earlier researchers, notably [[Adolph Wagner]] and [[Henry Morselli]],<ref>{{harvp|Stark|Bainbridge|1996|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=lm0DLM_T8zsC&pg=PA32 p. 32]}}</ref> who were much more careful in generalizing from their own data. Second, later researchers found that the Protestant–Catholic differences in suicide seemed to be limited to [[German-speaking Europe]] and thus may have always been the [[Spurious relationship|spurious reflection]] of other factors.<ref>{{harvp|Pope|Danigelis|1981}}</ref> Durkheim's study of suicide has been criticized as an example of the [[Fallacy|logical error]] termed the [[ecological fallacy]].<ref>Freedman, David A. 2002. ''[https://www.stat.berkeley.edu/~census/ecofall.txt The Ecological Fallacy]''. Berkeley: Dept. of Statistics, [[University of California, Berkeley|University of California]].</ref><ref>{{harvp|Selvin|1965}}</ref> However, diverging views have contested whether Durkheim's work really contained an ecological fallacy.<ref>{{harvp|van Poppel|Day|1996|p=500}}</ref> More recent authors such as Berk (2006) have also questioned the [[Structure and agency|micro–macro relations]] underlying Durkheim's work.<ref>{{harvp|Berk|2006|pp=78–79}}</ref> Some, such as [[Alex Inkeles|Inkeles]] (1959),<ref>{{harvp|Inkeles|1959}}</ref> Johnson (1965),<ref>{{harvp|Johnson|1965}}</ref> and Gibbs (1968),<ref>{{harvp|Gibbs|Martin|1958}}</ref> have claimed that Durkheim's only intent was to explain suicide ''sociologically'' within a [[holism|holistic]] perspective, emphasizing that "he intended his theory to explain variation among [[social environment]]s in the incidence of suicide, not the suicides of particular individuals."<ref>{{harvp|Berk|2006|p=60}}</ref>

Despite its limitations, Durkheim's work on suicide has influenced proponents of [[Control theory (sociology)|control theory]], and is often mentioned as a classic sociological study. The book pioneered modern [[social research]] and served to distinguish social science from [[psychology]] and [[political philosophy]].<ref name="Poggi_1" />{{Rp||at=ch.1}}