Durkheim's Interpretations

Durkheim's Interpretations Later studies have tended to confirm Durkheims original

interpretations. Halbachs (1930) argues that many of Durkheims

correlations, religious and domestic, may be more effectively

explained in terms of rural and urban life. Gibbs and Martin (1964)

have argued that the belief of status integration provides a more

quantifiable perception of integration.

Later studies adopt a positivist approach. Positivism argues for the

importance of separating facts from values, the former being those

things that are directly available to human experience and

observation.

These studies have suggested that some of the most important social

influences appear to arise from the development of modern society.

Suicide has been positively linked to the impersonality of urban life.

The traditional sociological approach has involved looking for the

social causes of suicide in statistical data and suicide rates

The interpretive critique raises the longstanding concern of accuracy

of suicide rates. The ideas and beliefs that different cultures hold

about suicide and self harm determine what is classified as suicide.

Atkinson (1978) developed some of Douglas’s ideas. He showed how

certain types of death and the evidence from the life history act as

suicidal cues which enable officials to build up a suicidal biography.

Taylor (1982) has shown that the death will only be recorded as a

suicide when the officials can find a suitable suicidal motive.

Interpretivists argue that sociology must explore the meanings that

suicidal individuals construct for their actions.

Douglas (1967) made the most comprehensive attempt to create an

interpretivist alternative to the Durkheimian approaches. He suggests

that recurring patterns of meaning include revenge, repentance, escape