Abbott简论：社会学的宏观—微观联接的七大观点及其不足

译自：Abbott, Andrew. 1990. ‘Conceptions of Time and Events in Social Science Methods: Causal and Narrative Approaches’. Historical Methods 23 (4): 140–50. 

至少在社会学里，微观结构和宏观结构的关系已经是个被广泛讨论的议题了。最佳的宏观理论，是相对制度性的，并且对待微观层次是相对固定的。马克思、韦伯和涂尔干以及他们的当代信徒，都有这种思维倾向。对比来说，至今最为令人振奋的微观理论，是将微观层次视为极度开放和不确定的。芝加哥学派、生态学家、象征互动论者都是继承了这样的立场。尽管有些英勇的学者，努力将这二者整合起来，但是还没有人真正办到过。在当前的社会学理论，虽然有大量的文献是关于这一议题，但是这些讨论大多缺少数据、可行性，甚至可理解性。这些文献是关于“理论上的修补”，是把一些普遍的概念凑在一起，然后就宣称他们已经解决了这个问题。

关于微观/宏观关系的一般看法，有以下几种：

第一，宏观结构只不过是微观境遇的总和。

第二，微观境遇只是宏观结构的案例。

第三，微观境遇是宏观过程的随机实现。

第四，宏观结构限制或促成了微观境遇。

第五，微观层次关乎自由，宏观层次关乎限制。

第六，宏观结构只不过是微观境遇的序列之随机限制。

第七，微观结构关乎心理，宏观结构关乎社会。

以上讨论的文献里，都没有认识到微观/宏观问题的本质是时间性的。也就是说，它们都没认识到微观/宏观问题在概念上（而非实践上）是关于时间视域。以上讨论文献的一般回顾，见

Alexander, J. C., B. Giesen, R. Munch, and N. J. Smelser. 1987. The micro-macro link. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.   

The relation of micro- and macrostructures is a widely discussed issue, in sociology at least. The best macrotheories are relatively institutional and treat the microlevel as relatively fixed. Marx, Weber, and Durkheim all tended to think this way, as have their current votaries. In contrast, by far the most exciting microtheories treat the microlevel as extremely open and uncertain. The Chicago School and the ecologists and symbolic interactionists who descend from them all take this position. Despite some valiant efforts, no one has really managed to put Humpty Dumpty together again. Although there is a large literature on the issue in current sociological theory, most of it lacks data, applicability, indeed even comprehensibility. It consists of "theory fixes" that stick together a few general concepts and claim to have solved the problem. Some standard views of the micro/macro relation are (1) macrostructures are simple aggregates of micro occasions, (2) micro occasions are mere instances of macrostructures, (3) micro occasions are stochastic realizations of macroprocesses, (4) macrostructures are constraints (alternatively, facilitators) for micro occasions, (5) micro is the level of freedom and macro that of constraint, (6) macrostructures are simply stochastic limits of sequences of micro occasions, and (7) microstructures are psychological, whereas macrostructures are social. None of this literature recognizes the micro/macro problem as inherently temporal, that is, none of it recognizes the conceptual, as opposed to practical, problem of time horizons. The standard review of this literature is Alexander, J. C., B. Giesen, R. Munch, and N. J. Smelser. 1987. The micro-macro link. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.   

（Sociological理论大缸第220期）

 链接：