Each of these interactions reinforces or casts doubt on these identities, with these examples highlighting points where major changes either took place or could have taken place. From this, it may be possible to see the ways in which the myths are maintained, and if change in these is to be accomplished, understanding each aspect of these daily interactions is necessary. C. Problems with Micro Approaches 1. Most symbolic interaction approaches examine the very micro level, conversation, interaction of two or three people, or small groups. While the description of interaction, and the manner in which meanings are interpreted and choices made can be shown in this setting, this approach may be difficult to move beyond this setting.
Larger structures do exist, as shown by legal or educational structures and bureaucracies.
We do exist within these, and exactly how these are built and maintained is more or less ignored by this approach. Extent of Structural Constraints Each of the approaches recognizes structural constraints, but differ concerning the strength of these constraints. For Durkheim, Parsons and perhaps Marx, the structural constraints are very strong, and leave little room for flexibility. An extreme symbolic interaction view might be that since society is composed of the actions of the individuals in it, the society might be almost anything the people in it wish it to be. But there are obviously constraints to this, and the symbolic interaction view may ultimately lead back to a conception of society as formed or fairly regular patterns of action and interaction, that is, structures.