Abstract
Durkheim had an ambitious plan to found a new sociology of modernity that would focus on how the conditions for making social facts had changed as societies diversified and modernized. This argument has an unexplored critical relevance for current issues of racial justice that are being exacerbated by a strong residual commitment to older consensus-based ways of making social facts. This paper contrasts two ways of making social facts—culture—in the US, tracing both back to Durkheim’s argument. One makes extensive use of “Dog-whistles” that rely on and maintain a consensus that resists change. The other is grounded in diversity, justice, and equality and promotes change. Because of the degree of reciprocity and cooperation the latter, which Durkheim called self-regulating constitutive practices require, justice and equality—what Garfinkel called “Trust Conditions”—are necessary prerequisites for their successful use. The crisis and division in the US in 2020 involving both anti-science and opposition to racial equality provides empirical evidence supporting Durkheim’s warning that if modern society does not guarantee the justice self-regulating practices required then it will fail.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
A. Comte, A general view of positivism London, Trübner and Co, 1856.
- 2.
É. Durkheim, The Division of Labor, Glencoe Illinois, Free Press, [1893] 1933.
- 3.
A. W. Rawls, “Durkheim’s Epistemology: The Neglected Argument.” American Journal of Sociology, 102(2), 1996a, pp. 430–482; A. W. Rawls, Epistemology and Practice: Durkheim’s The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2004; A. W. Rawls, “Introduction to Garfinkel’s ‘Notes on Language Games’: Language events as Cultural Events in ‘Systems of Interaction’”, The European Journal of Social Theory, 22, 2, 2019, pp. 133–147.
- 4.
É. Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, Glencoe Illinois, Free Press, [1912] 1915.
- 5.
Durkheim made arguments for the fundamental equality of native people and women before WWI that were ridiculed by his contemporaries, only to be criticized in the later twentieth century by scholars who claimed that he was not sensitive to issues of gender and Race: a “Catch-22”. Durkheim focused on how societies worked: arguing that both early and modern societies had the flexibility to accommodate change, whereas the so-called great societies in between were burdened with a degree of belief, ritual, and consensus that made them cumbersome and inflexible. The progress of the division of labor, he thought, would force those societies to change. But it would need help from sociology to smooth out the bumps. The controversy stirred up by Durkheim’s egalitarian approach explains many misunderstandings and reframings of his position, including ironically, the frequent charge that he was racist and sexist. See A. W. Rawls, “Durkheim’s Epistemology: The Initial Critique 1915–1924.” Sociological Quarterly, 38(1), 1996b, pp. 111–145.
- 6.
What it means to say that the proportion of self-regulating practices began to increase in the seventeenth century is complicated. There are always some self-regulating practices in all societies. Furthermore, the guilds, in which self-regulating practices predominate, have been a constant presence in many societies for thousands of years. See D. Weisberg, Guild Structure and Political Allegiance in Early Achaemenid Mesopotamia, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1967. What happened in the seventeenth century is that the general society outside of the guilds, in science, in many occupations, and in daily life, started to show signs that self-regulation was developing in the legal system, in sciences, and in philosophy. The changeover from common law to the codification of law is one example, as is the change that Durkheim described in Division as the transition from punitive to restitutive law.
- 7.
The term “rules” carries a lot of baggage. The argument is not that rules are followed—which Wittgenstein showed is impossible. Rather the idea is that there are mutual expectations about how practices are used that participants “orient”. Because they all orient these expectations, acting in ways that display their orientation to these expectations/rules is constitutive of sense-making. Thus, orienting the rules/expectations is an obligation, and displaying that orientation in one’s actions is constitutive of sense-making.
- 8.
These are two important misconceptions. (1) The current popularity of “habits” and “habitus” as a way of referring to practices is not an appropriate way of talking about constitutive practices. The work of using such practices may be taken-for-granted. But, it does not follow a formula and rarely repeats. Participants must be monitoring the enactment of practices going forward in order to cooperate. In É. Durkheim, The Division of Labor in Society, cit., p. 366, Durkheim uses the term habit to talk about traditions (the summary result/reproduction of past actions), not the rules that produce self-regulating practices. (2) Norms are traditional and maintain a boundary around tradition. They specify a range of acceptable behavior outside of which action is considered deviant. Constitutive order properties, by contrast, specify the criteria action must meet to count as action of a particular sort. Action can create new meanings and practices, there is no traditional boundary being maintained. Action that does not meet the constitutive criteria results in nonsense—not deviance.
- 9.
A. W. Rawls and W. Duck, Tacit Racism, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2020. In this book, Waverly Duck and I demonstrate the many ways in which centuries of injustice and lack of significant interaction between Races in America has resulted in differences in interactional expectations—the ordering rules of practices—that prevent Black Americans from being able to demonstrate competence in situated interaction with White Americans on many occasions—in spite of the fact that their Race and/or social position does not explicitly block them from participation. Of course, the differences would also prevent White Americans from demonstrating competence in spaces controlled by Black Americans. But, to this point White Americans control the principal spaces for work, education, government, and public life generally. Therefore, it is only Black Americans for whom this works as a systemic exclusion from the means of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This legacy of systemic racism is wreaking havoc in contemporary American life, as White Americans who are committed to racial equality, struggle with the fact that they are nevertheless perpetuating racism.
- 10.
É. Durkheim, The Division of Labor in Society, cit., p. 5.
- 11.
Ibidem, p. 22.
- 12.
Ibidem, p. 25.
- 13.
Modern scholarship on ancient Rome has begun to align with Durkheim’s argument without noting that he made it, although there are citations to Max Weber: J. Ward, Metropolitan Communities: Trade Guilds, Identity, and Change in Early Modern London, Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1997; B. De Munch, Guilds, Labour and the Urban Body Politic: Fabricating Community in the Southern Netherlands, 1300–1800, London and New York, Routledge, 2018. That scholarship now suggests, for instance, that actions taken by Roman emperors to weaken the guilds contributed significantly to the fall of Rome in the sixth and seventh centuries, much later than earlier historians believed: C. Wickham, The Inheritance of Rome: Illuminating the Dark Ages 400–1000, New York, Penguin, 2009. In this regard, they argue that the fall of the empire was not inevitable. During the last several centuries the guilds were the one part of Roman society that remained functional; they kept up the supply lines and kept industry functioning even as the centralized dictatorship was becoming ineffective. They were also the one place where diverse populations could find equality and justice. But, because of the equality they required, they were a threat to an increasingly central dictatorship which in dismantling them—dismantled itself.
- 14.
We always capitalize the word “Race” to highlight the fact that it is an arbitrary social fact and not a natural or biological fact.
- 15.
É. Durkheim, On Moral Education. Mineola New York, Dover Publications, [1925] 2002.
- 16.
A. W. Rawls and J. Turowetz, “Introduction”, Harold Garfinkel, Parsons’ Primer, Stuttgart, Springer, 2019, pp. 1–108.
- 17.
A. W. Rawls, “The Wartime Narrative in U.S. Sociology 1940–1947: Stigmatizing Qualitative Sociology in the Name of ‘Science’”, The European Journal of Social Theory, 21, 4, 2018, pp. 526–546.
- 18.
É. Durkheim, The Division of Labor in Society, cit., p. 33.
- 19.
A. W. Rawls and J. Turowetz, “The Other Interactionism”, Routledge International Handbook of Interactionism. D. vom Lehn, N. Ruiz-Junco, and W. Gibson (eds.), London, Routledge, (2022); A. W. Rawls and J. Turowetz, “Talcott Parsons and Harold Garfinkel: The Development of Culture as Interaction.”, The Routledge International Handbook on Talcott Parsons Studies, A. Javier Treviño and Helmut Staubmann (eds.), London, Routledge, (2022).
- 20.
H. Garfinkel, Parsons’ Primer, Stuttgart, Springer, 2019a.
- 21.
T. Parsons, “The Role of Theory in Social Research”. American Sociological Review, 3 (1), 1938, pp. 13–20.
- 22.
It is in the work of his student Marcel Mauss that the importance Durkheim placed on cooperation is most evident. However, cut off from Durkheim’s social fact argument by WWI and the loss of the Durkheim school, even Mauss’ classic The Gift (1925), which was intended to address the need for reciprocity to stabilize economic and social relations in the post WWI 1920s (“German reparations”), did not have the impact it should have: M. Mauss, The Gift, London, Norton and Norton, 1990.
- 23.
This is such a constant theme in newspapers and TV commentators and among pundits generally that it would be misleading to cite anyone in particular. It has become THE way of understanding what is going on.
- 24.
W. Duck and A. W. Rawls, “Interactional expectations reconfigure in the time of Covid-19 Implications for the uncertainty of social «reality»”, Etnografia Ricerca Qualitativa, 2020, pp. 207–216.
- 25.
É. Durkheim, The Division of Labor in Society, cit., pp. 377–9.
- 26.
F. Giddings, The Principles of Sociology, New York, Macmillan and Co., 1896; F. Giddings, The Theory of Socialization, New York, Macmillan and Co., 1897; W. G., Sumner, Folkways: a Study of the Sociological Importance of Usages, Manners, Customs, Mores and Morals, Boston, Ginn and Company, 1907.
- 27.
It is, ironically, in computer programming, where “objects” need to be recognizable without contingency of any kind, that the theoretical problem of how recognizable objects are created has become a practical problem. Because the theories in use replicate the general problems of the two “meaning prejudices” noted above, they do not enable programmers to create the necessary objects and lots of complicated “work-arounds” are necessary. See A. W. Rawls and D. Mann, “Getting Information Systems to Interact: The Social Fact Character of ‘Object’ Clarity as a Factor in Designing Information Systems”, The Information Society, 31(2), 2015, pp. 175–192.
- 28.
É. Durkheim, The Elementary forms of Religious Life, cit., pp. 366–385; A. W. Rawls, “Durkheim’s Epistemology: The Neglected Argument” cit.; A. W. Rawls, Epistemology and Practice, cit.
- 29.
There are some tricky points involved here. The difference between consensus based and self-regulating is ultimately whether the basic rules of the practice index/replicate content/consensus, in which case the basic rules are summary rules and not self-regulating. In a self-regulating practice the basic rules should be something like the rules of a game-like chess. They should tell you what moves are possible, and knowing something about possible moves tells others something about a move. But, preferred play should not be coded into the basic rules. If it is, then it is a form of practice constrained by consensus—not one that self-regulates. There is often a mixture of both.
- 30.
P. Winch, The Idea of a Social Science and Its Relation to Philosophy, London, Routeledge, 1958.
- 31.
Winch attempted to ground sociology in constitutive practices by connecting Weber with Wittgenstein. It is an important argument. However, the Durkheim/Garfinkel argument is much stronger and exists in the original. See A. W. Rawls, “Wittgenstein, Durkheim, Garfinkel and Winch: Constitutive Orders of Sensemaking” Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 41(4), 2011, pp. 396–418.
- 32.
This is not to say that words in self-regulating constitutive practices do not “carry” any meaning. But rather that they carry a great deal of meaning and that the matter of exactly which meaning on any particular occasion of use is settled by the order properties of the practices.
- 33.
H. Garfinkel, Seeing Sociologically, Paradigm Publishers Boulder Colorado, 2006.
- 34.
It is likely that there were closed systems for talking about communism during the McCarthy era as well, but they don’t appear to have become public.
- 35.
M. Alexander, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, New York, The New Press, 2010.
- 36.
“Family Values” was another dog-whistle used to try forcing Black women to get married instead of being eligible for welfare. Among the many problems with this policy was the fact that most Black women did not have the option of a viable marriage with an employed man who could support them in safety. See W. J. Wilson, The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, The Underclass, and Public Policy. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1987.
- 37.
It was 2017 before the general public became aware of the plan to call an Article V convention to rewrite the constitution. See J. Riestenberg, “U.S. Constitution Threatened as Article V Convention Movement Nears Success”, Common Cause, 3.21.2018.
- 38.
R. Denney, N. Glazer and D. Riesman, The Lonely Crowd: A Study of the Changing American Character, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1950.
- 39.
H. Marcuse, One Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society, London and New York, Routledge, 1964.
- 40.
K. Vonnegut, Player Piano: America in the Coming Age of Electronics, New York, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1952.
- 41.
H. Odum, Race and Rumors of Race: the American South in the Early Forties, Baltimore, John’s Hopkins University Press, 1943.
- 42.
H. Garfinkel, Parsons’s Primer, cit.
- 43.
A. W. Rawls and W. Duck, Tacit Racism, cit.
- 44.
É. Durkheim, The Division of Labor in Society, cit., p. 377.
- 45.
On one notable occasion Trump famously said that he had “lots of good words”, which is exactly the point. He does have lots of words—dog-whistles—that his followers will respond to.
- 46.
A. W. Rawls and W. Duck, Tacit Racism, cit.
- 47.
É. Durkheim, The Division of Labor in Society, cit., p. 397.
- 48.
It could be argued that Kant’s “Kingdom of Ends”—which represents a kind of ideal society—functions as a social limiting condition on his theory. The problem is that Kant’s conception of a Kingdom of Ends begins with the rational individual rather than with the Kingdom—and what the rules and relations between the “ends” would need to be to support a well-functioning Kingdom of ends. Therefore, it is still subject to Durkheim’s criticism.
- 49.
É. Durkheim, The Division of Labor in Society, cit., p. 3.
- 50.
Ibid., p. 397.
- 51.
I. Kant, Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1997.
- 52.
This imperative toward specialization and justice only holds after consensus has broken down. This is a very important point. Western societies have had a tendency to believe that they have a mission to bring freedom and justice to other societies. Durkheim’s point is that well-functioning comprehensive consensus societies should be left alone. In this he is in agreement with the argument of John Rawls’ Law of Peoples that well-functioning comprehensive societies do not need justice. Furthermore, the underlying social order of the society is not set up in such a way that it could support justice as long as consensus remains intact. See J. Rawls, Law of Peoples, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2001.
- 53.
W. E. B. Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folk, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1903; A. W. Rawls and W. Duck, Tacit Racism, cit.
- 54.
A. W. Rawls, “History of Sociology and the COVID-19 Virus: Durkheim (and Garfinkel)”, Timelines, Special Edition, Newsletter of the ASA History of Sociology Section, 29, May, 2020; A. W. Rawls, and D. Gibson, “Presentation of Self in a Masked World (Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis)”, Footnotes, 48(3), May/June, 2020, pp. 22–23; W. Duck and A. W. Rawls “Interactional expectations reconfigure in the time of Covid-19 Implications for the uncertainty of social «reality»”, cit.
- 55.
É. Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, cit.; A. Rawls, “Durkheim’s Epistemology: The Neglected Argument”, cit.; A. W. Rawls, “Introduction to Garfinkel’s ‘Notes on Language Games’”, cit.
- 56.
A. W. Rawls, “Introduction to Garfinkel’s ‘Notes on Language Games’”, cit.; H. Garfinkel, Parsons’s Primer, cit.
- 57.
H. Garfinkel, “A conception of and experiments with ‘trust’ as a condition for stable concerted actions”, O.J. Harvey (ed.), Motivation and social interaction New York, Ronald Press, 1963, pp. 187–238.
- 58.
T. Parsons, The Social System, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1951.
- 59.
H. Sacks, “On Understanding”. Unpublished Manuscript in the Garfinkel Archive, 1968, p. 13
- 60.
H. Garfinkel, “‘Notes on Language Games’: Language events as Cultural Events in ‘Systems of Interaction’”. The European Journal of Social Theory, May, 2019, pp. 148–174.
- 61.
Garfinkel was the one who made the argument first in a 1947 paper he wrote for Parsons, subsequently published as H. Garfinkel, Seeing Sociologically, cit. It is reasonable to suppose that Parsons’ adoption of the idea of “double contingency” was influenced by Garfinkel.
References
Alexander, Michelle, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, New York, The New Press, 2010.
Comte, Auguste, A general view of positivism. London, Trübner and Co, 1856.
Denney Reuel, Glazer Nathan and Riesman David, The Lonely Crowd: A Study of the Changing American Character, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1950.
Du Bois, William E.B., The Souls of Black Folk, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1903.
De Munch, Bert, Guilds, Labour and the Urban Body Politic: Fabricating Community in the Southern Netherlands, 1300–1800, London and New York, Routledge, 2018.
Duck, Waverly and Rawls, Anne W., “Interactional expectations reconfigure in the time of Covid-19 Implications for the uncertainty of social «reality»”, Etnografia Ricerca Qualitativa, 2020, pp. 207–216.
Durkheim, Emile, The Division of Labor, Glencoe Illinois, Free Press, [1893] 1933.
Durkheim, Emile, The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life, Glencoe Illinois, Free Press, [1912] 1915.
Durkheim, Emile, On Moral Education. Mineola New York, Dover Publications, [1925] 2002.
Durkheim, Emile and Rawls, Anne W., La Division du Travail Revisited: Vers une Théorie Sociologique de la Justice, Paris: Le Bord de l’Eau, 2019.
Garfinkel, Harold, “A conception of and experiments with ‘trust’ as a condition for stable concerted actions”, O.J. Harvey (ed.), Motivation and social interaction New York, Ronald Press, 1963, pp. 187–238.
Garfinkel, Harold, Studies in Ethnomethodology, Englewood-Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, 1967.
Garfinkel, Harold, Seeing Sociologically, Paradigm Publishers, Boulder Colorado, 2006.
Garfinkel, Harold, ‘The Red as an Ideal Object’, Etnografia e ricerca qualitativa, 1, 2012, pp. 7–18.
Garfinkel, Harold, Parsons’ Primer, Stuttgart, Springer, 2019a.
Garfinkel, Harold, “‘Notes on Language Games’: Language events as Cultural Events in ‘Systems of Interaction’”. The European Journal of Social Theory, May, 2019b, pp. 148–174.
Giddings, Franklin, The Principles of Sociology, New York, Macmillan and Company, 1896.
Giddings, Franklin, The Theory of Socialization, New York, MacMillan and Company, 1897.
Goffman, Erving, Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Chicago, Free Press, 1959.
Goffman, Erving, Stigma: the Management of Spoiled Identity. Englewood-Cliffs, NJ., Prentice-Hall, 1963.
Kant, Immanuel, Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Marcuse, Herbert, One Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society, London and New York, Routledge, 1964.
Mauss, Marcel, The Gift, London, Norton and Norton, 1990.
Odum, Howard, “Folkways and Technicways”, American Sociological Review, 2, 1937, pp. 336–346.
Odum, Howard, Race and Rumors of Race: the American South in the Early Forties, Baltimore, John’s Hopkins University Press, 1943.
Parsons, Talcott, “The Role of Theory in Social Research”. American Sociological Review, 3 (1), 1938, pp. 13–20.
Parsons, Talcott, “The Prospects of Sociological Theory,” American Sociological Review, 15:1, 1949, pp. 3–16.
Parsons, Talcott, The Social System, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1951.
Rawls, Anne Warfield, “Durkheim’s Epistemology: The Neglected Argument.” American Journal of Sociology, 102(2), 1996a, pp. 430–482.
Rawls, Anne Warfield, “Durkheim’s Epistemology: The Initial Critique 1915–1924.” Sociological Quarterly, 38(1), 1996b, pp. 111–145.
Rawls, Anne Warfield, Epistemology and Practice: Durkheim’s The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Rawls, Anne Warfield, “Wittgenstein, Durkheim, Garfinkel and Winch: Constitutive Orders of Sensemaking” Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 41(4), 2011, pp. 396–418.
Rawls, Anne Warfield, “Introduction to ‘The Red’ by Harold Garfinkel, Etnografia e ricerca qualitativa, 1, 2012 pp. 7–18.
Rawls, Anne Warfield, “The Wartime Narrative in U.S. Sociology 1940–1947: Stigmatizing Qualitative Sociology in the Name of “Science”, The European Journal of Social Theory, 21, 4, 2018, pp. 526–546.
Rawls, Anne Warfield, “Introduction to Garfinkel’s ‘Notes on Language Games’: Language events as Cultural Events in ‘Systems of Interaction’”, The European Journal of Social Theory, 22, 2, 2019, pp. 133–147.
Rawls, Anne Warfield, “History of Sociology and the COVID-19 Virus: Durkheim (and Garfinkel)”, Timelines, Special Edition, Newsletter of the ASA History of Sociology Section, 29, May, 2020.
Rawls, Anne Warfield, “Harold Garfinkel’s Focus on Racism, Inequality and Social Justice: The Early Years 1939–1952”, in Ethnomethodology: a Retrospective, John Heritage and Doug Maynard (ed.) Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2021 (Forthcoming).
Rawls, Anne W. and Mann, David, “Getting Information Systems to Interact: The Social Fact Character of ‘Object’ Clarity as a Factor in Designing Information Systems”, The Information Society, 31(2), 2015, pp. 175–192.
Rawls, Anne Warfield and Turowetz, Jason, “Introduction”, Harold Garfinkel, Parsons’ Primer, Stuttgart, Springer, 2019, pp. 1–108.
Rawls, Anne W. and Gibson, David, “Presentation of Self in a Masked World (Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis)”, Footnotes, 48(3), May/June, 2020, pp. 22–23.
Rawls, Anne Warfield, Whitehead, Kevin and Duck, Waverly, “Introduction”, Black Lives Matter: Ethnomethodological and Conversation Analytic Studies of Race and Systemic Racism in Everyday Interaction, London, Taylor and Francis, 2020, pp. 4–38.
Rawls, Anne W. and Duck, Waverly, Tacit Racism, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2020.
Rawls, Anne Warfield and Turowetz, Jason, “The Other Interactionism”, Routledge International Handbook of Interactionism. Dirk vom Lehn, Natalia Ruiz-Junco, and Will Gibson (eds.), London, Routledge, (2022).
Rawls, Anne Warfield and Turowetz, Jason, “Talcott Parsons and Harold Garfinkel: The Development of Culture as Interaction”, The Routledge International Handbook on Talcott Parsons Studies, A. Javier Treviño and Helmut Staubmann (eds.), London, Routledge, (2022).
Rawls, John, Law of Peoples, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2001.
Riestenberg, Jay, “U.S. Constitution Threatened as Article V Convention Movement Nears Success”, Common Cause, 3.21.2018.
Sacks, Harvey, “On Understanding”. Unpublished Manuscript in the Garfinkel Archive, 1968.
Sumner, William Graham, Folkways: a Study of the Sociological Importance of Usages, Manners, Customs, Mores and Morals, Boston, Ginn and Company, 1907.
Vonnegut, Kurt, Player Piano: America in the Coming Age of Electronics, New York, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1952.
Ward, Joseph, Metropolitan Communities: Trade Guilds, Identity, and Change in Early Modern London, Stanford, Stanford University Press, 1997.
Weisberg, David, Guild Structure and Political Allegiance in Early Achaemenid Mesopotamia, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1967.
Wickham, Chris, The Inheritance of Rome: Illuminating the Dark Ages 400–1000, New York, Penguin, 2009.
Wilson, William Julius, The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, The Underclass, and Public Policy. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1987.
Winch, Peter, The Idea of a Social Science and Its Relation to Philosophy, London, Routeledge, 1956.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rawls, A.W. (2021). Durkheim’s Self-Regulating “Constitutive” Practices: An Unexplored Critical Relevance to Racial Justice, Consensus Thinking, and the COVID-19 Pandemic. In: Marcucci, N. (eds) Durkheim & Critique. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75158-6_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75158-6_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-75157-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-75158-6
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)