ABSTRACT
A variety of problems faces the researcher attempting to assess the significance of Durkheim’s thinking about social morphology. Coming to grips with his thought is made difficult by the absence of any sustained development of his ideas on this particular topic, which therefore requires reassembling from numerous separate sources, usually written with different objectives than those of clarifying the subject matter and purpose of social morphology. There are indeed a number of passages in the corpus of Durkheim’s writings in which ‘morphology’, ‘morphological facts’ and ‘social morphology’ are referred to or discussed explicitly. But the passages show a good deal less consistency than might be desired for a straightforward exegetical account of the place of social morphology in his sociology. Indeed, this very state of affairs serves as an important reminder, in itself easily overlooked but nonetheless of considerable significance, that Durkheim’s thinking on social morphology changed markedly as his views on other areas of sociology developed over time (Andrews 1984; Lukes 1973).
