Concept

The author's concept is based upon an understanding of how the human psyche operates, in addition to how societies operate collectively. The human psyche desires satisfaction in several areas of life. This satisfaction is based not upon what is immediately available, but rather upon the desire itself, which could be unlimited. Individual satisfaction can be limited by external social factors, such as a universally accepted moral value, or the material state of other individuals.

Assumptions

The author assumes that individuals are dissatisfied when all their desires are not met. He also assumes a fundamental difference between human and animal desire and fulfillment. Human beings have the faculty of comparing their own state of well being with what could potentially be acquired. This in turn is based upon what is observed for other individuals. A discrepancy between one's own acquisitions and that of others could lead to unrealistic hope for future fulfillment and therefore perpetual disappointment. Animals, on the other hand, desire only what is immediately necessary to sustain their lives.

Implications

If Durkheim's reasoning is to be accepted, one would have to assume that human beings are more or less at the mercy of internal and external forces. From inside, desire and...

From outside, a continual bombardment of the perceived success levels of others and moral law rule fulfillment. It appears that the author does not recognize the human faculty of reason; that desire could be curbed by the knowledge that the means to fulfill such desires are limited or should be shared. Furthermore, the author also does not recognize the human faculty of philanthropy. The desire to help others reach a certain standard of living may also curb the desire to fulfill one's own individual needs beyond the means to do so.
Point-of-View

As indicated above, I do not entirely agree with the author's point-of-view. While I can understand the reasoning behind the points he makes, I believe that Durkheim has considered the issue from a purely materialistic viewpoint: If my desire for material things are not fulfilled, I am unhappy. In this, he entirely discards the fulfillment that might be derived from other, higher means such as helping uplift those who live in perpetual poverty or committing oneself to some other acts of goodwill. Furthermore, I do not believe that the suicide rate is necessarily higher when a society goes through upheaval or crisis. Nor do I believe that the author is correct in assuming that suicide is necessarily the direct result of not perpetually fulfilling desire.