(Watson, 2009) With the increase in the size of the society the division of labor also increases and it requires a complex organization of labor which gave rise to specialization and the basis for the collective conscience slowly and gradually started to diminish. Durkheim believed that the complexity does not lead to disintegration but it leads to interdependence. When an individual is not producing all the things then he is dependent on others to fulfill his needs and for that they must interact. The legal system in such societies would be based on exchange instead of punishment.
Emile Durkheim observed that the economists had upheld the division of labor as necessary and a pre requisite for the society to progress. Emilie Durkheim recognized that it was not only limited to the economical world but it was also applicable in aesthetics and scientific activities as well. He viewed that the law of division of labor was applying not only to the human societies but its impact was also on the biological organisms organized, explained, described and classified. Durkheim always considered that societies are subject to conditions. Durkheim had made a distinction between the “social” and “economic” division of labor. He identified that economic division is related to the workforce while social workforce includes the social links and bonds created as humans interact in a society and do the things that are needed to be done. He pondered the nature of social links and bonds which he has mentioned as “social solidarity”. (Watson, 2009) These links according to him emerged from the social division of labor. He studied how the division of labor and social solidarity worked in different societies and thought that it did so in 2 ways.