Understanding Studies Understanding Sovereignty and Social Facts — Émile Durkheim Re-read (v0.0) —

Author: Y. Seo (@momotarou / Japan) Role: Metanist — Human–AI Understanding Architect AI Collaborator: GPT-5 (AI Understanding Trainer, A.U.T.) ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0005-7669-0612Series: Understanding StudiesVersion: v0.0 (Exploratory Draft)Year: 2026 0. Positioning of This Paper (On v0.0) This paper is not a completed work. Nor does it aim to provide a comprehensive review of Émile Durkheim’s sociology. The purpose of this exploratory note is singular: Why does “society” appear as an autonomous force, detached from individual human understanding? This question is approached through the concept of Understanding Sovereignty, while intentionally preserving the author’s process of inquiry. Rather than updating Durkheim’s theory, this paper attempts a de-conditioning of its underlying assumptions. 1. What Did It Mean to Treat Social Facts “As Things”? Durkheim famously asserted: Social facts must be treated as things. This statement has long been interpreted as a methodological declaration: social phenomena should not be reduced to individual psychology, but analyzed as external and constraining facts. However, a simple question arises: Why do social phenomena appear as “things” in the first place? When society becomes detached from human understanding and meaning-making, it naturally comes to behave like an object. This paper therefore proposes the following reinterpretation: Social facts can be treated as things only when understanding sovereignty has been severed from individuals. This is not a rejection of Durkheim’s method, but an explicit clarification of the condition under which it becomes valid. 2. When Does Society Cease to Appear as the Sum of Individuals? Durkheim repeatedly emphasized that society is not a mere aggregation of individuals, but possesses its own reality and force. Yet this claim also describes a particular mode of appearance. Under what conditions does society cease to be experienced as an extension of individuals? The hypothesis advanced here is as follows: Society appears irreducible to the sum of individuals when the circulation of understanding is interrupted. In societies where understanding circulates, society is experienced as an extension of individual agency. When understanding is suspended and meaning-making is delegated to habit, norms, or atmosphere, society emerges as an external and coercive force. 3. What Does the Suicide Rate Actually Measure? In Suicide, Durkheim treated suicide not as an individual psychological act, but as a social fact. Crucially, he relied not on absolute numbers, but on rates. This paper introduces the following tentative hypothesis: The suicide rate represents the proportion at which understanding sovereignty has shifted from individuals to society, expressed statistically at the collective level. This interpretation does not reduce suicide to social blame, nor does it deny individual responsibility. As long as understanding sovereignty remains with the individual, social factors do not operate as direct coercive forces. When understanding sovereignty is lost and meaning-making is externalized, society begins to exert pressure directly upon individuals. 4. Habitualized Division and “Brainwashing” The division of understanding is not always the result of deliberate control. More often, it follows a gradual process: Commands become rules Rules become customs Customs become atmosphere At this stage, no explicit agent of control remains, yet understanding does not return. This paper characterizes such a state as follows: Brainwashing is a social structure in which the non-exercise of understanding sovereignty becomes habitual and normalized. This is not conspiracy, but the outcome of everyday stabilization. 5. Provisional Conclusions (v0.0) This exploratory note advances the following provisional conclusions: Social facts appear as “things” only under specific conditions Society appears autonomous from individuals only under specific conditions These conditions correspond to the severance of understanding sovereignty Durkheim demonstrated the strength of society. This paper instead seeks to clarify the conditions under which society appears strong. When these conditions are lifted, society may once again reconnect with human understanding. v0.0 Notes for Subsequent Development Where does understanding sovereignty become severed? Why does this severance become habitual? How is it reproduced across generations? These questions are reserved for v1.0 and beyond. This paper is published as an exploratory note (v0.0) within the Understanding Studies series and is subject to future revision and expansion.