Comprehensive sociology relies on as explained above, since it combines the fact that it is a subjective and empirical science, but at the same time you can explain linking patterns of human behavior and the person against society. Although comprehensive sociology has its principles in mental and rational nature of human, it has no direct relation to the science of psychology. It does not mean that do not take into account, simply that their study focuses on human action and consequences, not so much in the reflection and the functioning of thought. Webber says that through the Act of an individual all the social structure that surrounds it is affected. There is individuality, but as all sociological studies relies on subjectivity. Any human act has a purpose, even if the individual who runs it is not fully aware of this, either for routine or because you simply can’t record and reason for his way of thinking and acting, and this does not relate with the society in which he lives.
Equally, external people who have influence in the main social actor, have a purpose other than what could be the ultimate aim of the social Act, as the influence of parents over their children. At the time at which the individual becomes aware of his actions and reactions that causes this, becomes a mobile part of society and acquires a special power over the environment that surrounds it, because it’s very different when you have full knowledge of what is being done when really the end is met but without any conscience, although this has validity against sociology. Comprehensive sociology in relation to legal science ranks this as something objective, also based on empirical consensus of society. I.e. the right to manifest the rules that society must continue to be part of a system and, ideally, maintain harmony and cooperation looking for purposes of common interest, but these rules are based on the pattern I mentioned at the beginning.