MACRO Vs MICRO
MACRO Vs MICRO
The perspectives in sociology are divided into macro and micro. This division is influenced by the two
different approaches to studying the social system and social phenomenon. The macro approach looks at
the wider impact of society on the individual and how this shapes his/her behaviour. This is the approach
of both the functionalist and the conflict perspectives. Both see society as a system of interrelated parts,
with the parts being analyzed in relation to the whole. Thus, the individual is seen as a passive contributor
to the construction of his/her reality from a macro perspective. The reduced role of the individual is one of
the criticisms of the macro perspectives.
Functionalism sees the individual as being influenced by society through social facts which are norms,
values, rules, regulations, and laws. These coerce the individual into acting. Hence, the actions of the
individuals are neither physiological nor psychological, but because of the influence of society. The need
for social order which is facilitated by a collective conscience results in organic solidarity, due to the need
for modern society to survive.
The conflict theories see the economic system as the driving force behind individual’s action. According to
Marxist theory, the economic system forms the basis of society or the infrastructure and the norms,
values, and beliefs make up the superstructure. The superstructure is determined by the economy. Note
that within this, the individual is seen as passive. His/her need to survive resulted in being forced to enter
into economic activities. These relations of production resulted in conflict among the various classes in
society. Conflict then becomes the driving force of social change and not the individual.
The failure to include the individuals within the main discussion about social change and social order
result in these macro perspectives leaving gaps in their discussions about society and the behaviour of
groups and social institutions in society. The micro perspectives filled the gaps in this regard. They look
at society from the point of view of the individual. They are also concerned with how the individual's
behaviour is shaped by his/her interactions, the use of symbols and the meaning they placed on these
symbols. From the Weberian perspective, the role of the individuals and how they view the role of others
as well as the meaning individuals give to their actions, are critical elements in the examination of the
social system.
Students should pay special attention to Weber's argument in his social action theory as he supplied
some of the shortcomings of both the functionalist and the conflict view of social phenomenon such as
stratification, structural change, conflict, distribution of power and other social issues.
Micro Sociological perspectives start with the view that the actions of individuals in society cannot be
fully understood by reference only to the system or structures of society. The micro perspective is
concerned with understanding the interactions and exchanges of people in the social context or settings
in which they occur. It emphasizes the meaning that individuals and groups have for their interactions
and tries to understand them from the point of view of the participants or actors.
Social Action theory focuses on the meanings of social action for individuals and for groups. The theory
suggests that causes for social action can be found if we use the meaning that individuals have for their
actions as the starting point for arriving at these causes.
Weber and other interpretive thinkers though that history and the social sciences should aim at
discovering the “interpretative understandings” of unique sequences of events. Weber believed that it is
through the process of interpretative understanding of patterns of social action, that sociologist could
arrive at causal explanation of sequence of events.
According to Weber the existing societal structures, namely institutions, practices, values and beliefs
that influence our actions are seen as the outcome of past actions of persons. Human actions and
interactions are presented as having influenced and are continually influencing the existing societal
structures. Weber is saying fundamentally that there are two sets of influences on individual behavior a)
those of the wider world (structures in the society as a whole); b) those of the private world of meaning
and motives (interactions in small groups and between individuals).
Max Weber’s sociology is fundamentally concerned with employing both an interpretive understanding
and causal explanations of social action and interaction.