Essay on Power ⋆ Sociology Essay Examples ⋆ EssayEmpire

This example Essay on Power is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.

Power is an ”essentially contested and complex term” (Lukes 1974: 7). Some theorists define power as the capacity to act (”power to”). Hobbes’s (1985 [1641]: 150) definition of power as a person’s ”present means . . . to obtain some future apparent Good” is a classic example of this understanding of power. Others define power as getting someone else to do what you want them to do (”power over”). Feminist authors, such as Stacey and Price (1983: Women, Power and Politics), define power in this manner when they view it as the more or less one-sided patriarchal ability to position women’s lives through the actions of men over them. Alternatively, Foucault (1977) suggests power is ”relational.” One social actor may exercise power over others, but all individuals nevertheless possess power as they can engage in resistance.

Sociologists have focused primarily (but not exclusively) upon ”power over” viewpoints. Marxism is a classic example. It argues power derives from economic ownership, with a ruling class (the bourgeoisie) controlling the means of production, distribution and exchange within capitalist society. Sociological discussion of ”power over” is typical held to begin with Weber (1978). Weber distinguished between coercive power and power based upon three types of legitimate authority: charismatic, traditional, and legal-rational. People obey charismatic leaders, such as Jesus Christ, because of the personal qualities of the person doing the telling. Traditional authority involves acceptance of rules that symbolize ritual or ancient practice, such as religion. Weber held that modern societies are increasingly characterized by the growth of bureaucracies whose formal rules of procedure are legitimized by legal-rational authority.

Weber laid the foundation stones on which sociologists later developed ”pluralist” and ”elitist” viewpoints when discussing power. Pluralist theorists (e.g. Dahl 1961: Who Governs?) view power as being held by a variety of competing groups within society. Since no one group is able to dominate all others (because of checks and balances built into a democratic system of government) a ”plurality” of competing interest groups, political parties, and so forth, is held to characterize democratic society. In contrast, elite theorists (e.g. Mills 1959: The Power Elite) argue that rather than there being a simple plurality of competing groups within society, there is instead a series of elites: powerful groups who are able to impose their will upon the rest of society.

Foucault’s (1977) analysis contrasts with ”pluralist” and ”elitist” viewpoints by focusing upon the ”microphysics” of power. Power does not lie in the hands of a sovereign ruler or the state, but rather lacks concrete form, occurring only at a locus of struggle (Foucault 1978: The History of Sexuality, vol. 1). Power is therefore not possessed, but rather is recognized in and through acts of resistance. Resistance through defiance defines power and hence becomes possible through power. Without resistance, power is absent.

Bibliography:

Foucault, M. (1977) Discipline and Punish. Penguin, London.
Hobbes, T. (1985) [1641] Leviathan. Penguin, New York. Lukes, S. (1974) Power: A Radical View. Macmillan, London.
Weber, M. (1978) Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology, trans. E. Fischoff et al. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.