Power
From Geography
DennisPrince (Talk | contribs) |
(→Contributors) |
||
| (16 intermediate revisions not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
He defines Power as 'a capability of transformation' (Lippuner & Werlen, 2009). One who has more power has the capability to change the structures of social [[praxis]]. Power plays an important part in social encounters: power is implicit in all interactions and social relations. | He defines Power as 'a capability of transformation' (Lippuner & Werlen, 2009). One who has more power has the capability to change the structures of social [[praxis]]. Power plays an important part in social encounters: power is implicit in all interactions and social relations. | ||
| - | |||
== Power in the classical meaning == | == Power in the classical meaning == | ||
Power in the classical sense is usually meant as a person or organisation that has influence over a large group of people. | Power in the classical sense is usually meant as a person or organisation that has influence over a large group of people. | ||
| - | In the past the church had most of the power, but nowadays it is mostly the state. | + | In the past the church had most of the power, but nowadays it is mostly the state. Power can be defined as the ability of person A to influence the actions of person B. You can divide power in two categories, soft and hard. Soft power is the ability to get what you want through attraction rather than through coercion (Nye, 2004). Hard power on the other hand is the use of force or economic measures to influence behaviour. |
== Power according to Foucault == | == Power according to Foucault == | ||
| Line 13: | Line 12: | ||
* Power relations | * Power relations | ||
* Finalised activities | * Finalised activities | ||
| - | Power can only be used/acknowledged when it limits freedom or the other person(s) in the relationship has a (limited) freedom. | + | Power can only be used/acknowledged when it limits freedom or the other person(s) in the relationship has a (limited) freedom. To understand study power relations the forms of resistance against this power has to be studied (''See [[Conflictual (power) relationship]])''. So to understand the power relations, not the ones exercising power have to be studied, but the ones who are at the side of resistance have to be studied. |
Power only exists when actions are implemented, subjects can react with consensus or with violence as an instrument, but this can also be an outcome. With power there also has to be some sort of freedom as a condition, if not, the subject won't agree with the amount of power that their leader has and they will struggle. | Power only exists when actions are implemented, subjects can react with consensus or with violence as an instrument, but this can also be an outcome. With power there also has to be some sort of freedom as a condition, if not, the subject won't agree with the amount of power that their leader has and they will struggle. | ||
| - | |||
== Examples of Power == | == Examples of Power == | ||
| - | + | An example of power in the classical meaning can be a king or emperor in a historical context. The king would have power over a large group of people as head of state. He would control the army and justice system. All power would flow from the king. A more recent example is Fascism where the nation was controlled by one person. | |
| - | Power according to Foucault is meant on a smaller level. For example when you are sick and go the the doctor, the doctor has power over you. He has knowledge you do not have which you have to follow blindly if you want to get better. | + | Power according to [[Michel Foucault]] is meant on a smaller level. For example when you are sick and go the the doctor, the doctor has power over you. He has knowledge you do not have which you have to follow blindly if you want to get better. |
| + | Besides that [[Michel Foucault]] mentions in his paper ''The Subject and Power'' (1983) [[Pastoral Power]], this kind of power enable humans to express their individuality, but is also restricting because this individuality is difficult to cope with. Pastoral power has its origins in the Christian institutions, but is nowadays incorporated by the modern Western nation states. This kind of power is focused on reaching savation, sacrificing itself for life and salvation, looking after individuals (instead of [[society]] as a whole) and it quests for a knowledge of the conscience and an ability to direct it | ||
== Transformative capacities == | == Transformative capacities == | ||
| Line 33: | Line 32: | ||
* Lippuner, R. & Werlen, B. (2009). Structuration theory. In: Internation encyclopedia for human geography. Elsevier. | * Lippuner, R. & Werlen, B. (2009). Structuration theory. In: Internation encyclopedia for human geography. Elsevier. | ||
* Foucault, M. (1983). '' Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics'', p. 208-266. | * Foucault, M. (1983). '' Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics'', p. 208-266. | ||
| + | * Foucault, M. (1983). ''The Subject and Power'', p. 208-226 | ||
| + | * Nye, J. S. (2004) Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. | ||
== Contributors == | == Contributors == | ||
| Line 40: | Line 41: | ||
* ''Edited by'' --[[User:SuzanneBleijenberg|SuzanneBleijenberg]] 16:19, 12 October 2012 (CEST) | * ''Edited by'' --[[User:SuzanneBleijenberg|SuzanneBleijenberg]] 16:19, 12 October 2012 (CEST) | ||
* ''Example added by'' --[[User:DennisPrince|DennisPrince]] 10:53, 16 October 2012 (CEST) | * ''Example added by'' --[[User:DennisPrince|DennisPrince]] 10:53, 16 October 2012 (CEST) | ||
| + | * ''Edited by Huub van der Zwaluw'' [[User:HuubVanDerZwaluw|HuubVanDerZwaluw]] 16:39, 23 October 2012 (CEST) | ||
| + | * ''Page enhanced by Koen Molenaar'' [[User:KoenMolenaar|KoenMolenaar]] 13:42, 25 October 2012 (CEST) | ||
| + | * ''Page enhanced by Marjolein Kouwenhoven, october 25th 2012'' | ||
Latest revision as of 12:38, 25 October 2012
Power, in relation to the structuration theory (Lippuner & Werlen, 2009), is closely linked to the concept of resources. Within the structuration theory, the term resource does not refer directly to something material, like natural resources or raw materials. Resources rather refer to power over people and materials: it is more the capability to steer resources, not the actual physical 'having of' resources. It is therefore more a subjective power then a objective power.
He defines Power as 'a capability of transformation' (Lippuner & Werlen, 2009). One who has more power has the capability to change the structures of social praxis. Power plays an important part in social encounters: power is implicit in all interactions and social relations.
Contents |
Power in the classical meaning
Power in the classical sense is usually meant as a person or organisation that has influence over a large group of people. In the past the church had most of the power, but nowadays it is mostly the state. Power can be defined as the ability of person A to influence the actions of person B. You can divide power in two categories, soft and hard. Soft power is the ability to get what you want through attraction rather than through coercion (Nye, 2004). Hard power on the other hand is the use of force or economic measures to influence behaviour.
Power according to Foucault
Foucault refers to 'power' in the relational sense, not about power itself. By which he means that you can influence the other person in the relationship. He refers to three types of relationships, who also overlap each other, support one another and are used mutually (Foucault, 1983).
- Systems of communication
- Power relations
- Finalised activities
Power can only be used/acknowledged when it limits freedom or the other person(s) in the relationship has a (limited) freedom. To understand study power relations the forms of resistance against this power has to be studied (See Conflictual (power) relationship). So to understand the power relations, not the ones exercising power have to be studied, but the ones who are at the side of resistance have to be studied. Power only exists when actions are implemented, subjects can react with consensus or with violence as an instrument, but this can also be an outcome. With power there also has to be some sort of freedom as a condition, if not, the subject won't agree with the amount of power that their leader has and they will struggle.
Examples of Power
An example of power in the classical meaning can be a king or emperor in a historical context. The king would have power over a large group of people as head of state. He would control the army and justice system. All power would flow from the king. A more recent example is Fascism where the nation was controlled by one person. Power according to Michel Foucault is meant on a smaller level. For example when you are sick and go the the doctor, the doctor has power over you. He has knowledge you do not have which you have to follow blindly if you want to get better.
Besides that Michel Foucault mentions in his paper The Subject and Power (1983) Pastoral Power, this kind of power enable humans to express their individuality, but is also restricting because this individuality is difficult to cope with. Pastoral power has its origins in the Christian institutions, but is nowadays incorporated by the modern Western nation states. This kind of power is focused on reaching savation, sacrificing itself for life and salvation, looking after individuals (instead of society as a whole) and it quests for a knowledge of the conscience and an ability to direct it
Transformative capacities
Giddens (Lippuner & Werlen, 2009) distinguishes two types of transformative capacities: of authorization and allocation.
Authorizative resources refer to the capacity of controlling the humanly created social world: controlling the actors themselves (the power to organize social time-space paths of human individuals).
Allocative resources refer to the capability of controlling the natural basis of human life: steering the appropriation and use of material objects. Therefore, allocation resources involve a transformative capacity generating command over material phenomena.
References
- Lippuner, R. & Werlen, B. (2009). Structuration theory. In: Internation encyclopedia for human geography. Elsevier.
- Foucault, M. (1983). Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics, p. 208-266.
- Foucault, M. (1983). The Subject and Power, p. 208-226
- Nye, J. S. (2004) Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics.
Contributors
- page created by Lars-Olof Haverkort --LarsHaverkort 16:41, 16 September 2012 (CEST)
- page enhanced by --DennisPrince 10:57, 26 September 2012 (CEST)
- Edited by --SuzanneBleijenberg 16:19, 12 October 2012 (CEST)
- Example added by --DennisPrince 10:53, 16 October 2012 (CEST)
- Edited by Huub van der Zwaluw HuubVanDerZwaluw 16:39, 23 October 2012 (CEST)
- Page enhanced by Koen Molenaar KoenMolenaar 13:42, 25 October 2012 (CEST)
- Page enhanced by Marjolein Kouwenhoven, october 25th 2012
