What are 2 differences between structuralist theories of society, and interpretivist theories of society?

Structuralist theories see the structure of society as being formed from the top-down, that is, society is an objective factual reality which exists above and beyond us, and is able to constrain our behaviour. In contrast, social action and interpretive theorists argue that society is created from the bottom-up, meaning it is individual human agency and action which creates the society in which we live. For example, interactionists argue that people are not controlled by the ‘relations of production’, as Marxists would suggest, or ‘pattern variables’, as Functionalists would suggest, but rather they actively work at their relationships, and in creating and responding to symbols and ideas during the course of interaction. As labelling theorists would suggest, individuals applying meaning and labels to a situation actively defines what the situation is, giving is real and enduring consequences. It is the individuals which create the structure. In contrast, marxists argue that the economic structure of society has an external reality of its own. The economic system is determined by its social structure, and the owners of the economic structure are able to control society and construct values and social relationships to reflect their own interests.The methodologies used by structural and interpretivist theorists also reflect their differences. For instance, given that structural theorists such as Functionalists and Marxists see society as having an external reality of it's own, and therefore is an objective entity, they therefore believe that scientific, detached and objective, empirical methods can be used to study society. This is demonstrated in Durkheim's famous study of suicide rates, where he studied official statistics on suicide, regarding them as objective figures, that is, 'social facts'. On the other hand, interpretivist theorists prefer to use methods which help the researcher to extract the meanings that individuals attach to social phenomena, reflecting their belief that society is a product of the actions of individuals, rather than it being something that transcends them, and constrains their behaviour like cultural 'dupes' or 'puppets'.