ABSTRACT
Ferdinand Tonnies' use of Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft resembles in certain respects conceptual forms that are a part of an old tradition of typing social entities antithetically. Examples of this tradition are such familiar conceptualizations as Durkheim's mechanical and organic solidarity; Cooley's primary group; Pitirim A. Sorokin's familistic vs. contractual relations; and Becker's sacred and secular societies. Durkheim's investigation of suicide brought about a fundamental change in his conception of the conscience collective as put forth in The Division of Labor in Society. Sorokin's familistic and contractual relationships correspond respectively to Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft and have been used as pairs to accompany these concepts, i.e., familistic Gemeinschaft and contractual Gesellschaft. Although not following properly in the tradition of dichotomously typing society, the types of action constructed by Max Weber are directly relevant to the Tonnies' formulation, the Talcott Parsons' formulation which is to follow, and the present context in general.
