Editing Émile Durkheim (section)

==Influence and legacy==

Durkheim has had an important impact on the development of anthropology and sociology as disciplines. The establishment of sociology as an independent, recognized academic discipline, in particular, is among Durkheim's largest and most lasting legacies.<ref name="Calhoun2002-107" /> Within sociology, his work has significantly influenced structuralism, or [[structural functionalism]].<ref name="Calhoun2002-107" /><ref name="Allan_103" /> Scholars inspired by Durkheim include [[Jonathan Haidt]], [[Marcel Mauss]], [[Maurice Halbwachs]], [[Célestin Bouglé]], [[Gustave Belot]], [[Alfred Radcliffe-Brown]], [[Talcott Parsons]], [[Robert K. Merton]], [[Jean Piaget]], [[Claude Lévi-Strauss]], [[Ferdinand de Saussure]], [[Michel Foucault]], [[Clifford Geertz]], [[Peter L. Berger|Peter Berger]], social reformer Patrick Hunout, and others.<ref name="Calhoun2002-107" />

More recently, Durkheim has influenced sociologists such as [[Steven Lukes]], [[Robert N. Bellah]], and [[Pierre Bourdieu]]. His description of ''[[collective consciousness]]'' also influenced [[Ziya Gökalp]], the founder of Turkish sociology<ref name="Turkay Salim Nefes">{{harvp|Nefes|2013}}</ref> who replaced Durkheim's concept of society with nation.<ref name="Kieser">{{cite journal |last1=Kieser |first1=Hans-Lukas |title=Europe's Seminal Proto-Fascist? Historically Approaching Ziya Gökalp, Mentor of Turkish Nationalism |journal=Die Welt des Islams |date=29 April 2021 |volume=61 |issue=4 |pages=411–447 |doi=10.1163/15700607-61020008 |s2cid=241148959 |url=https://brill.com/view/journals/wdi/61/4/article-p411_411.xml |issn=1570-0607}}</ref> An ideologue who provided the intellectual justification for the Ottoman Empire's [[wars of aggression]] and massive [[demographic engineering]]—including the [[Armenian genocide]]—he could be considered to pervert Durkheim's ideas.<ref name="Kieser"/><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Smith |first1=David Norman |title=Ziya Gökalp and Emile Durkheim: sociology as an apology for chauvinism? |journal=Durkheimian Studies / Études Durkheimiennes |date=1995 |volume=1 |pages=45–50 |jstor=44708513 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/44708513 |issn=1362-024X}}</ref> [[Randall Collins]] has developed a theory of what he calls ''interaction ritual chains'', a synthesis of Durkheim's work on religion with that of [[Erving Goffman]]'s [[Microsociology|micro-sociology]]. Goffman himself was also influenced by Durkheim in his development of the ''interaction order''.

Outside of sociology, Durkheim has influenced philosophers, including [[Henri Bergson]] and [[Emmanuel Levinas]], and his ideas can be identified, inexplicitly, in the work of certain [[Structuralism|structuralist]] theorists of the 1960s, such as [[Alain Badiou]], [[Louis Althusser]], and [[Michel Foucault]].<ref group="lower-roman">{{harvp|Bourdieu|Passeron|1967|pp=167–68}}: "For, speaking more generally, all the social sciences now live in the house of Durkheimism, unbeknownst to them, as it were, because they walked into it backwards."</ref>

===Durkheim contra Searle===
Much of Durkheim's work remains unacknowledged in philosophy, despite its direct relevance. As proof, one can look to [[John Searle]], whose book, ''The Construction of Social Reality'', elaborates a theory of social facts and collective representations that Searle believed to be a landmark work that would bridge the gap between [[Analytic philosophy|analytic]] and [[continental philosophy]]. [[Neil Gross]], however, demonstrates how Searle's views on society are more or less a reconstitution of Durkheim's theories of social facts, social institutions, collective representations, and the like. Searle's ideas are thus open to the same criticisms as Durkheim's.<ref>{{harvp|Gross|2006}}</ref> Searle responded by arguing that Durkheim's work was worse than he had originally believed, and, admitting that he had not read much of Durkheim's work: "Because Durkheim's account seemed so impoverished I did not read any further in his work."<ref>{{harvp|Searle|2006}}</ref> [[Steven Lukes|Stephen Lukes]], however, responded to Searle's reply to Gross, refuting, point by point, the allegations that Searle makes against Durkheim, essentially upholding the argument of Gross, that Searle's work bears great resemblance to that of Durkheim. Lukes attributes Searle's miscomprehension of Durkheim's work to the fact that Searle, quite simply, never read Durkheim.<ref>{{Citation|last=Lukes|first=Steven|title=Searle versus Durkheim|date=2007|url=https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6104-2_9|work=Intentional Acts and Institutional Facts: Essays on John Searle's Social Ontology|pages=191–202|editor-last=Tsohatzidis|editor-first=Savas L.|series=Theory and Decision Library|place=Dordrecht|publisher=Springer Netherlands|language=en|doi=10.1007/978-1-4020-6104-2_9|isbn=978-1-4020-6104-2|access-date=2020-12-05}}</ref>

===Gilbert pro Durkheim===
[[Margaret Gilbert]], a contemporary British philosopher of social phenomena, has offered a close, sympathetic reading of Durkheim's discussion of social facts in the first chapter and the prefaces of ''[[The Rules of Sociological Method]]''. In her 1989 book, ''On Social Facts''—the title of which may represent an homage to Durkheim, alluding to his "{{Langx|fr|faits sociaux|label=none}}"—Gilbert argues that some of his statements that may seem to be philosophically untenable are important and fruitful.<ref>[[Margaret Gilbert|Gilbert, Margaret]]. 1989. ''On Social Facts''. chap. 4, s.2.</ref>