Is there an inconsistency, or do I merely fail to understand Dr. Durkheim?
Let us take for example Durkheim's theory of Division of Labour.
But it seems impossible to hold to this in the fact of the objections advanced by Durkheim and Lang.
The argument, in fact, falls to pieces of its own weight, as Durkheim has shown.
I have therefore passed over the questions discussed by Dr Durkheim.
This is the view of Dr. Durkheim, who explains the blood superstition.
Dr. Durkheim regards the present state of Arunta affairs (the totems not being peculiar to either phratry) as une drogation.
Again , Dr. Durkheim's theory involves the same difficulty as my own.
This idea we shall find again later, in another part of Dr. Durkheim's system.
All this is (as far as I can see), by Dr. Durkheim's own previous statement, impossible.