Excellent and foundational sociological question:
If social facts are coercive (Durkheim), how can people break away and create new patterns of behavior?
This strikes at the heart of structure vs agency debate in sociology.
Social facts do exert coercion, but that coercion is not absolute or permanent.
People can change behavior due to:
This is where the limits of Durkheim’s theory become visible and other thinkers like Weber, Giddens, and Bourdieu become useful.
| Durkheim’s View | But Then What? |
|---|---|
| Social facts are external, general, and coercive. | Yes, but society evolves, and people reinterpret, resist, or collectively change those facts. |
| Coercion works through norms, laws, morality. | Yet norms can conflict, and when large numbers deviate, new norms can emerge. |
| Theorist | How People Change Pattern Despite Coercion |
|---|---|
| Durkheim | Collective consciousness can shift → leads to new social facts. Eg: modern vs primitive society. |
| Weber | Social action is guided by meaning; individuals can act rationally or value-driven against norms. |
| Bourdieu | Habitus is internalized structure, but people develop "strategies" based on changing field. |
| Giddens | Structuration: Structures constrain and enable. Repeated small changes in action → change structure. |
| Gramsci (Neo-Marxist) | Through counter-hegemony, people develop a new "common sense" challenging old social facts. |