Chapter Summary

Beginning in the 1980s there was renewed interest in the micro-macro linkage. Despite the early integrationist tendencies of the classical theorists, much of 20th-century theory was either micro-extremist or macro-extremist in its orientation. On the macro side are theories such as structural functionalism, some variants of neo-Marxian theory, and conflict theory. Conversely, symbolic interactionism, ethnomethodology, exchange and rational-choice theory are all examples of micro-extremism. Thus micro- and macro- extremism can be seen as a development in modern theory, and indeed, many of the classical theorists can be understood as having an interest in the micro-macro linkage. A renewed interest in micro-macro integration arose in the 1980s.

There are two strands of work on micro-macro integration. The first involves attempting to integrate various micro and macro theories, such as combining structural functionalism and symbolic interactionism. The second involves creating theory that effectively combines the two levels of analysis. This chapter focuses primarily on the latter.

Integrated Sociological Paradigm

George Ritzer has attempted to construct an Integrated Sociological Paradigm built upon two distinctions: between micro and macro levels, and between the objective and subjective. This produces four dimensions: macro-objective, large-scale material phenomena such as bureaucracies; macro-subjective, large-scale ideational or nonmaterial phenomena such as norms; micro-objective, small-scale material phenomena such as patterns of behavior; and micro-subjective, small-scale ideational or nonmaterial phenomena such as psychological states or the cognitive processes involved in "constructing" reality. These are not conceptualized as dichotomies, but rather as continuums. Ritzer argues that these dimensions cannot be analyzed separately, and thus the dimensions are dialectically related, with no particular dimension necessarily privileged over any other.

Ritzer has utilized this integrated approach to look at the consequences of the rise in consumer debt in Expressing America: A Critique of the Global Credit Card Society. He attempts to integrate micro and macro by focusing on the micro-level personal troubles it creates, as well as the macro-level public issues involved. Personal troubles are those problems that affect an individual and those immediately around him or her. In the case of credit cards, individuals are accumulating large amounts of debt, resulting in prolonged periods of financial trouble. Public issues tend to be those that affect large numbers of people. Credit cards create public issues because of the large number of people indebted to credit card companies, which have given rise to bankruptcies and delinquencies. Ritzer demonstrates the dialectical relationship between the personal troubles and public issues created by policies and procedures of credit card firms, such as deluging the populace with pre-approved cards, as well as targeting minors for credit cards.

Multidimensional Sociology

Jeffrey Alexander has used an integrative approach that very much resembles Ritzer's. Though the dimensions along which he differentiates the levels of social phenomena differ, they mirror the distinctions created by Ritzer: rather than micro-macro, Alexander uses problems of order, which can be either individual or collective. Rather than subjective-objective, Alexander uses problems of action, which range from materialist (instrumental, rational) to idealist (normative, affective). Despite this similarity in analytical approaches, Alexander and Ritzer differ in the strategy used to integrate the various levels of analysis. Unlike Ritzer, Alexander privileges the macro over the micro. Alexander sees micro-level theory as unable to adequately deal with the unique nature of collective phenomena and unable to adequately handle macro-level phenomena generally. More specifically, Alexander's sympathies lay with collective/normative-level-oriented theory. Only this form of theory can sufficiently deal with macro-level phenomena while remaining coherent and without constructing structural dopes that act at the whim of macro-objective level phenomena.

Micro-to-Macro Model

James Coleman (1926-1995) has attempted to apply micro-level rational-choice theory to macro-level phenomena. As an overall integrative approach this is unsatisfactory as it provides insufficient insight into the macro-micro connection. Using Max Weber's (1864-1920) Protestant Ethic thesis, Coleman built a model explicating his integrative model. To Coleman, these various levels of analysis were related causally, and thus did not take into account feedback among the various levels. Allen Liska has tried to improve upon this model by giving more attention to the macro-to-micro linkage and to relationships among macro-level phenomena, though the relationships are still causal. Liska also argues for the increased use of a particular way of describing macro phenomena, aggregation. Unlike structural and global explanations, which rely on poorly understood processes such as emergence, the meaning of aggregation is easily elaborated.

Micro Foundations of Macrosociology

Randall Collins's integrative approach, which he calls radical microsociology, focuses on interaction ritual chains, that, when linked together, produce large scale, macro-level phenomena. Hoping to centralize the role of human action and interaction in theory, Collins rejects the idea that macro-level phenomena can act, instead focusing on the premise that, ultimately, someone, an individual, must do something in order for action to occur.

Back to the Future: Norbert Elias's Figurational Sociology

One European of note, Norbert Elias (1897-1990), has contributed significantly to an integrative sociology. Elias developed the notion of figuration to avoid analytically dichotomizing levels of analysis. Figurations are social processes that interweave people in relationships, creating interrelationships. Figurations are not static, coercive macro-structures, but rather are conceptualized as relatively fluid processes of inter-relationships among individuals that create shifting relations of power and interdependence. Elias makes relationships between people central, particularly relations of interdependence, in contradistinction to individualistic and atomistic approaches.

The History of Manners

Elias demonstrates his integrative approach in his best-known work, The Civilizing Process, which has two volumes, The History of Manners and Power and Civility. This work deals with the expansion of civility, or manners, across society. More abstractly, it relates changes in the structure of society to changes in the structure of behavior. The History of Manners deals primarily with the diffusion of manners (micro), while Power and Civility deals primarily with the changes in society that brought rise to the diffusion of manners (macro). Central to Elias's work are the changing levels of interdependence among people. This was the result of increases in differentiation in society from competition. Increased differentiation leads to increased interdependence, which in turn leads to an increase in consideration for other people. This has a number of effects: a transformation of control, from being relatively little and external, to an interiorization of control by individuals, who self-police. It also creates what Elias calls a shifting frontier of embarrassment created by a lack of self-control over impulses, and thus changes in manners. These changes were diffused throughout society by the creation of certain types of figurations. According to Elias, these figurations made it possible for a king to emerge, and it was in the king's court, populated by nobles, from which the habits and rules of the day emanated. Because nobles had long dependency chains, Elias believed they needed to be particularly sensitive to others. The king's increasing power, particularly through taxation and the monopolization of the means of violence, also encouraged sensitivity among nobles. Thus the civilizing process is tied to the "reorganization of the social fabric" through competition and interdependence. These macro level changes made possible a set of relationships that produced wide-scale changes in micro-level patterns of behavior throughout society, beginning in the king's court with his nobles.