Two Individuals Can Never Be the Same in All Aspect of Their Lives

From the sociological point of view, there are basically two approaches to studying social relations among individuals. The functionalist’s cum conflict approach sees society from a macro-sociological view and asses it as an objective structure and process. The school focuses on large-scale groups and processes. The interactionists focus on individuals and the relations among them. This is largely a micro-sociological approach, which places heavy emphasis on human subjectivity. Thus the school stresses the individual actor in society as the source of human action. A major assumption is that “social reality consists of behaving individuals” and these individuals create society and culture “using those aspects that they have incorporated into their personalities”. Social relations, therefore, “consist of agreements and disagreements among individuals who incessantly define and redefine the world around them” (Rossides, 1998: 269)
Apart from the scope of analysis, sociological analysis of social relations highlights differences between objectivity and subjectivity of social actors in social relation. The Weberian perspective, however, provides a middle-of-the-road approach that blends objective facts with the subjective interpretation given to these facts (Swenson, 1999: 30). This is captured in Weber’s own words:
…very frequently, the world images [views] that have been created by ideas, like switchmen, determined the tracks along which action has been pushed by the dynamic of interest. “From what” and “for what” one wished to… and… “could be” redeemed depended upon one’s image of the world” (Weber, 1995: 26).
It is also important to note that in history, world views are concentrated in the inspiration of a few but eventually such views become the conviction of many. The creation of such world views coalesces around the interest of a few, who use the consent of many& protect narrow interests.