1. Power is one of the most misinterpreted concepts. Baldwin, Boulding and
Stinchcombe are defining the types of power and the way power functions. In their definitions, they have some similarities as well as differences. All three, see power as multidimensional, but they differ in their further explanations of power.
Arthur Stinchcombe sees power as a (subset) of structural phenomena and its interested in understanding power as a social thing. (Stinchcombe, 149) Power is found through the structure we build, in ways that suits our preferences. Contingent upon the power structures in society, the act of categorizing things, is act of power. In society power is relational. We structure the use of power in a way that the majority of society views as legitimate. Legitimacy, like power, is a social phenomenon. The power is not legitimate based on its use, but the legitimacy people give to it. To Stinchcombe, power is rational, situational and is contingent on legitimacy.
Kenneth Boulding’s definition of power is simply the ability to get what we want. He sees power as a relational phenomenon. Power and legitimacy are remarkably …show more content…
Baldwin believes that power can be channeled and controlled through institutions. The problem of power is its measurability, power in one domain can be weakness in another. (Baldwin, 178;181) For instance, when we advocated the use of military power, we underestimate its importance and impact. The fungibility of force is the most important matter. Baldwin explains that “fungibility refers to the ease with which power resources useful in one area can be used in other areas.” (Baldwin, 180) To what extend one form of power translates into a positive outcome in other domains. For example, to what extend military power in a limited way transforms into a positive outcome in non-military
Stinchcombe are defining the types of power and the way power functions. In their definitions, they have some similarities as well as differences. All three, see power as multidimensional, but they differ in their further explanations of power.
Arthur Stinchcombe sees power as a (subset) of structural phenomena and its interested in understanding power as a social thing. (Stinchcombe, 149) Power is found through the structure we build, in ways that suits our preferences. Contingent upon the power structures in society, the act of categorizing things, is act of power. In society power is relational. We structure the use of power in a way that the majority of society views as legitimate. Legitimacy, like power, is a social phenomenon. The power is not legitimate based on its use, but the legitimacy people give to it. To Stinchcombe, power is rational, situational and is contingent on legitimacy.
Kenneth Boulding’s definition of power is simply the ability to get what we want. He sees power as a relational phenomenon. Power and legitimacy are remarkably …show more content…
Baldwin believes that power can be channeled and controlled through institutions. The problem of power is its measurability, power in one domain can be weakness in another. (Baldwin, 178;181) For instance, when we advocated the use of military power, we underestimate its importance and impact. The fungibility of force is the most important matter. Baldwin explains that “fungibility refers to the ease with which power resources useful in one area can be used in other areas.” (Baldwin, 180) To what extend one form of power translates into a positive outcome in other domains. For example, to what extend military power in a limited way transforms into a positive outcome in non-military