Organic Unity vs. Constructed Interests: Understanding Gemeinschaft an
Organic groups (Gemeinschaft) arise spontaneously, unconsciously, and are based on the natural interconnectedness of existence, whereas groups formed by conscious will (Gesellschaft) are created through deliberate efforts and united on the basis of individual interests. This means that in the former case, the connection between members is deep, solidaristic, and often “inherently valuable” – examples being a family or a tribe, where people are bound not only by blood ties but also by a shared destiny. As stated in one of the sources:"One must distinguish between organic groups that arise spontaneously and unconsciously (for example, the family as an institution, a tribe) and groups that are created and formed by the conscious human will (for example, trade unions, economic trusts, etc.). The structure of the first type of groups approximates that of an organic whole, while that of the second type resembles a mechanical aggregate. The German sociologist Tönnies calls the first type Gemeinschaft (community) and the second type Gesellschaft (society). The groups of the second type are united by a commonality of private interests. The groups of the first type by a commonality of being (a will to a shared destiny). It is clear that the interactions within “organic” groups are of a more profound, more solidaristic nature than those in “mechanical” groups, which, nevertheless, are socially and outwardly more active." (source: link txt)Thus, organically forming groups are characterized by a sense of shared destiny and unity that sustains itself without conscious effort, whereas groups formed by deliberate will tend to be formal associations where participants make agreements based on personal or professional interests. This viewpoint is also supported:"One must distinguish between organic groups that arise spontaneously and unconsciously (for example, the family as an institution, a tribe) and groups that are created and shaped by the conscious human will (for example, trade unions, economic trusts, etc.). ... The groups of the second type are united by a commonality of private interests. The groups of the first type by a commonality of being (a will to a shared destiny)." (source: link txt)Thus, the difference between Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft lies precisely in the nature of the union – an organic, natural, and profound connection versus a consciously and rationally organized structure aimed at achieving specific, often utilitarian, goals.Supporting citation(s):"One must distinguish between organic groups that arise spontaneously and unconsciously (for example, the family as an institution, a tribe) and groups that are created and shaped by the conscious human will (for example, trade unions, economic trusts, etc.). The structure of the first type of groups approximates that of an organic whole, while that of the second type resembles a mechanical aggregate. The German sociologist Tönnies calls the first type Gemeinschaft (community) and the second type Gesellschaft (society). The groups of the second type are united by a commonality of private interests. The groups of the first type by a commonality of being (a will to a shared destiny). It is clear that the interactions within “organic” groups are of a more profound, more solidaristic nature than those in “mechanical” groups, which, nevertheless, are socially and outwardly more active." (source: link txt)"One must distinguish between organic groups that arise spontaneously and unconsciously (for example, the family as an institution, a tribe) and groups that are created and shaped by the conscious human will (for example, trade unions, economic trusts, etc.). ... The groups of the second type are united by a commonality of private interests. The groups of the first type by a commonality of being (a will to a shared destiny)." (source: link txt)