Macro sociology versus Micro sociology 1
Consider macro versus micro sociological approaches.What are micro sociologists’ key criticisms of macro-sociology? What are macro sociologists’ key criticisms of micro-sociology? Identify one or two sociologists from each camp to argue your point.
Social Theory
Dr.Oliver Benoit
By: Sheldon Hosten
Introduction
Society is controlled by a system which consists of social structure and orders for the functioning of society. Taking into account the functioning of society we must pay particular attention to the micro and macro sociological approaches. The term micro sociology and macro sociology has two distinguishing meaning pertaining the social structure of society. Micro sociology involves study of small groups and social units within a larger social system. Macro sociology refers to the study of large scale social system and long term patterns and processes. In this writing, I will discuss what are micro sociologist key criticisms against macro sociologist and vice-versa. In addition, I will be recognizing two individual social theorists; Emile Durkheim taking a macro sociological approach and Herbert Blumber taking a micro sociological approach, in my discussion.
Macro vs Micro sociological approaches
The macro sociological approach is a discipline which explains the analysis of social systems and population on a large scale. Such a study involves the targeting of social structures that organize as well as divide individuals into political, social or religious organization, ethnic population, communities, and nation-states.Furthermore,Macro sociology deals with broad societal trends which can be applied to smaller features of a society.
Microsociology on the other hand,focuses on individual thought, actions and symbolic interactions. This interaction differs from macro sociology as it involves analysis rather than statistical determination. Micro sociology, focus on the individual every day social interaction on a small scale which can be applied to the larger society.
Theories in Micro sociology
Herbert Blumber coined the term "symbolic interactionism," were he set out three basic premises on the perspective which are:"Humans act toward things on the basis of the meanings they ascribe to those things.""The meaning of such things is derived from, or arises out of, the social interaction that one has with others and the society.” Finally,"These meanings are handled in, and modified through, an interpretative process used by the person in dealing with the things he/she encounters."Blumber emphasized that human beings must be able to understand each other, because social life is a negotiated process. Thus, it is common for individuals to try to find similarities in their actions and behavior with whom they interact.
Durkheim, micro sociological theory was based on social facts.The term social factsrefer to the values, cultural norms, and social structures which are external to the individual. Durkheim made two distinctions between social facts in which he divided them into material and non material social facts. Material social facts are the physical social structure which influences the individual whereas the non material social facts are values, norms and other conceptual beliefs.
Theories of Macro sociology
The four major theories in macro sociology are: the idealist strategy, the materialist strategy, functionalism and conflict theory. Firstly, Idealists believe human uniqueness lies in the fact that human beings attach symbolic meanings to their actions.
The Materialists Strategy, on the other hand,explains the basic features of human social life in terms of practical material conditions of their existence. Such as nature of the physical environment, the level of technology, and the organization of the economic system.
Furthermore, Functionalism essentially states that societies are complex systems of interrelated and interdependent parts, and each part of society exists because it has a specific function to perform in contributing to the society as a whole.
The Conflict Theoryis based on the structure of society which is determined by individuals and groups acquiring scarce resources to satisfy their own needs, thus creating endless conflict.
Micro sociologist Herbert Blumper
Herbert Blumber became a major interpreter of Mead’s work by explaining the term symbolic interaction. Blumber’s definition of symbolic interaction refers to “the course to the peculiar and distinctive character of interaction as it takes place between human being (Arnold M.Rose,1962 pg 359).” Blumber’s emphasis was more on the study of social action among small groups than that of social structure. He argued that individual action is a reflection of others, which is part of social life. It is differentiated from macro structures such as economics and the bureaucratic system.
In the understanding of symbolic interaction according to Blumber, “the self acts as an indication of how the individual will function in a society. However, Herbert Mead elaborated more on self when he stated that the self is something which has developed and was not initially there at birth,but arises in the process of social experience and activity.Furthermore, the self consisted of the “I” and the “Me”.The “I” is the response of the organism to the attitudes of others, and the “Me” is the organized set of attitudes that one assumes of others.
Thirdly, according to Blumber, social action occurs in highly and organized human society where by members are interrelated in a multiplicity of complex ways such as the sharing of common interest.Such interest may be shared as a result of conflict and cooperation among small groups.
Macro sociologist Emile Durkheim
Emile Durkheim, took a macro sociological approach andstated that even though human beings may act in different ways, most individuals in society conform to social fact. Social facts denotes ways of acting, thinking and feeling which is external to the individual and involves the power of thought which results in the regulation of conduct.
For Durkheim, even though individual has full control over actions, most individuals live their lives through institutions such as family, church and schools, which provide a regulated way to behave in society. Overall, from a micro-sociological perspective the individual interactions are shaped by the action of others. However, on the macro sociological level the individuals in society confirms to social fact which are establish.
Differing from micro sociology, society in macro sociology is organized on the basis of authority, laws and social order in which individuals are subjected to conform to cooperation. In such a society legal norms are imposed and agreed upon, rules are established, commands are given and obedience follows.
This type of structure can be classified as a bureaucratic system that operates by rules and methods of procedure. Thus society operating on the basis of laws has little attention to individual interest and focuses more on cooperation of a large group of members. In this system individuals are separated to carry out different functions at various positions.
Conclusion
Micro and macro sociology has contributed to the development of society in many ways. The micro sociology shows that the individual functions in society based on the action of others. However such action is determined by self which is an indication of how the individual will face the society. From a macro sociological point of view, the individual functions in the large society not by individual traits, but by conforming to a dynamic social systemthat involvesmembers in a group. Therefore, the micro sociological approach is taking the individual and fitting him/her into the society in which one has to conform to macro sociological approaches such as norms, authority and hierarchial structure. Overall, every society is controlled by the system of micro and macro sociological approaches, and without these systems society will resort to a downfall in its social structure from an individual to a societal level.
Reference
Hadden, R. W. (1997). Sociological Theory: an introduction to the classical tradition.
Toronto: broadview.
Calhoun,C. (1952). Classical SociologicalTheory
Blackwell reader in sociology.
Coser, A. L. (1997). Masters of sociological though: Ideas in Historical and social context.
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Inc.