I know in class we sort of focused on how macro and micro were different. We used the example for macro that an author doesn’t really write a novel, but that the novel is essentially produced by the author’s position in society and outside factors like economics. And micro is focusing on the individual versus massive (outside) phenomena.
What I was kind of wondering about deals with micro and that whole phenomenology thing we’ve briefly mentioned in class once or twice. So I’m in a micro state of mind, focusing on the individual, then I try and take into account phenomenology. Now with that (phenomenology) we’re talking about meanings/lifeworlds/people’s present perspectives being essentially dictated by a menagerie of our perceptions of realities with regard to past experiences. Or another way of looking at it in terms of actors and roles, which we talked about today. I, at least in part, define myself/my role by distinguishing myself from others in the play. So in terms of influence,
macro: outside factors –influence-> individual
micro: other people –influence-> me
And in this particular type of case, even with focusing on the individual (my role), there are outside factors, specifically people.
So I guess what I’m trying to say is that even with focusing on the individual in micro, I can’t really get away from “outside factors” so to speak.
I *think* phenomenological approaches would be micro.
I imagine you can apply lifeworlds and horizons to macro level groups, but your ability to pull out meaningful information is limited. The broader the lifeworld, the more the group has in common and the less “interesting” stuff you can pull out. By interesting, I really mean conflict between lifeworlds.
For me, phenomenology makes more sense or becomes more useful as the size of your group decreases. More detailed lifeworlds will reveal more conflict which hopefully leads to more resolution and understanding.
Tyler, I like your point. I just wonder if it is still “interesting” for designers when the size of various group decreases. Does it mean that design today needs to target a group which has small size? (which might be easier for designers to find out and define their lifeworlds and horizons)
If the design is for many groups which have conflict liefeworlds, what can designers do?
intra/interpersonal vs extrapersonal