Political Philosophy
Lecture 1 – PP
Power
1. Why power?
Who should have political power? (which individual/groups etc.)
- Democracy, separation of powers (judicary, executive government, parlement)
How should power be distributed?
- Justice, equality
What constitutes abuse of power?
When is this harmful?
- Corruption, bribery, coercion, bias
- Concerned when decisions, actions influenced by powers
Care about power in three contexts (Moriss):
Practical what you can bring about, what others can do
Moral relevant for ascribing responsibility – must have power to be blameworthy
Evaluative forming groups means I gain certain powers, but also become subject
to power of others. We can evaluate societies in terms of the power they grant
individuals to control one’s life
important then, to identify power – thus, we need to know what it is
Cases of power? – voorbeelden met power
- While the majority voted against the Intelligence and Security Services Act 2017 (March
2018), the referendum was non-binding and the public has no power to change the law
- The media repeatedly emphasized that the main issues surrounding Brexit were about
sovereignty and immigration
- Richard Thaler: “..but I think most of us would rather..have our kids be well educated..” (dit
geeft dan dus aan dat er zo over het algemeen wordt gedacht, meeste vinden dit)
A. Luke’s Three dimensions
1. One-dimensional
- Power as prevailing in decision making (macht als overheersende factor in decision making)
- ‘A has power over B to the extent that he can get B to do something that B would not
otherwise do’ (Robert Dahl)
E.g. managers (deze kunnen je bijvoorbeeld ontslaan als je het niet doet, zij hebben
deze macht dus)
- Mechanism: coercion
Authority, personality, control of resources of uncertainty
- Young: powerlessness as one dimension of oppression (onderdrukking)
Non-professionals take orders and rarely give them, unable to decide on conditions of
work, little/no work autonomy, unable to exercise judgement
Deze hebben dus totaal geen power
- Problems
Ignores why some issues relevant, and how people come to have preferences
Subject to Dowding’s ‘blame fallacy’
Blame Fallacy
If power is capacity to intentionally control events to make something happen
And you want to measure who has power
1
, Look for who benefits to infer (om af te leiden) who has power
(decision-making procedure not always transparent)
Dowding – this inference (gevolgtrekking) is too quick!
- Those who benefit may be lucky rather than powerful
Blame Fallacy: concluding that the beneficiary must be exercising power
But, watch for the ‘systemically lucky’
- Some benefit as consequence of how society is structured
- E.g. capitalist routinely benefit as a consequence of politicians drive to ensure
strong economy
Coercion by authority
2. Two-dimensional
- Power as control of agenda
(+ one-dimension) – (Bachrach & Baratz)
Low levels also implicit
Decide whats get debated
E.g. Crenson on air pollution
- Would expect cities to devote comparable amount of time debating issue
- But, in some cities, the issue is only rarely discussed
- Cannot be described as issue of power given only one-dimensional account,
no conflict
- Crenson observed correlation with prominent industry (in deze steden onder tafel)
- Lukes – example of power to influence decision-making process
Power of non-decision-making
- Mechanism: manipulation
Selective information provision: media image, storytelling (presenting the case in
specific terms/language), shaping anticipated results, preventing tactics
Taboes maken zodat mensen er niet over praten, en conflict vermeden wordt
3. Three-dimensional
- Power as preference-shaping
(+ one and two dimensions)
Most effective/efficient use of power – affects what people want to do so as to
correspond to the interest of the powerful (beïnvloedt wat mensen willen doen om
overeen te stemmen met de belangen van de machtigen/mensen met power)
Prevents or precludes conflict (voorkomt of sluit conflicten uit)
- ‘the fight is won before it has even begun’ (Parvin)
Illusions (‘false consciousness’) that reinforce powerful interests (Lukes)
- Mechanism: domination
Articulating ideology, manufacturing consent, conformity, depoliticization
Ideology
- Multiple usages of term:
2
, i. A worldview (‘my ideology is…’ cf. ‘my philosophy is…’)
ii. An approach that is ‘doctrinaire’ (elements of partisanship, extremism, dogmatism,
impracitcality and detachment from real world (onvoorspelbaarheid en onthechting
van de echte wereld)
iii. The ‘end of ideology’ thesis (Fukuyama, Bell et al): elements of i. and ii.: no more
competing fundamentally different worldviews; in view of vindication of liberal
democracy, such disagreements put down to faults under ii
- Distinguish: pejorative/descriptive senses (Geuss)
- Focus here: pejorative
An idea associated with Marxism: roughly distortion of consciousness that occurs
because it serves certain interests… (vervorming van bewustzijn dat optreedt omdat
het bepaalde belangen dient)
Summary:
Baratz Bachrach Lukes Dahl
Cases of Power? – die eerder zijn besproken
- no one-dimensional power (bij referendum was non-binding)
- wel second-dimensional power (bij referendum)
Power-over; Power-to
- All three dimensions describe power-over
Getting someone else to do what you want them to do
Lukes 3 dimensions in general form:
‘A exercised power over B when A affects B in a manner contrary to B’s interests’
- Focus on power as domination, or power-over others reflects narrow (androcentric) interest
- What about power-to?
‘the ability of an individual actor to attain an end or series of ends’ (Allen 1998, p.34)
om een doel of een reeks doelen te bereiken
‘the human ability not just to act but to act in concert’ (Arendt 1970, p.44)
collectively dus gezamenlijk op te treden
Various feminists have emphasised something more like power to, e.g.
‘empowerment’ see e.g. Hartsock 1993, Held 1992
Self-develop for instance
Could think of power-over as species of power-to
2. Contested concept (omstreden concept)
3
, Some suggest Power is a contested concept:
- Explanation 1: different conceptions appropriate for different research contexts and
disciplines (conceptions = opvattingen)
- Explanation 2: our conceptions of power are shaped by power relations
Lukes: “How we may think about power may serve to reproduce and reinforce power
structures and relations, or alternatively it may challenge and subvert them. It may contribute
to their continued functioning, or it may unmask their principles of operation, whose
effectiveness is increased by their being hidden from view. To the extent that this is so,
conceptual and methodological questions are inescapably political and so what ‘power’
means is ‘essentially contested’” discuss who got power
Summary lecture 1
- Investigation of power requires understanding of what it is
- Lukes three-dimensional account
One dimensional: pravailing in decision making + blame fallacy
Two dimensional: agenda setting
Three dimensional: preference setting + ideology
- Power-over vs Power-to
- Essentially contested concept
For thought
What kinds of power are at work in your university education?
Do you think organizational culture can be a form of power?
Do you think your idea of what power is, is itself influenced by power?
Lecture 2 – PP
Power II
Introduction to Foucault
Michel Foucault
Not just shaping preferences and affecting behaviour, but shaping subjects, how to
make people a certain way
Power is ubiquitous – accompanies all social interaction
- Not a resource that people have, but feature of relations (build in the relationship)
- Not always bad (creates who we are), sometimes productive, but can be dangerous
can shape you in a way you don’t like
1. Genealogy
Genealogical method (contrast with conceptual analysis analyze everyday and define a
specific definition natural development of human progress)
History of a concept, practice, or norm that challenges the perceived naturalness of the
topic, or the idea that its evolution is the result of necessary and natural progress
Rather, a concept or idea is influenced by contingent events (random things that
happen), power, and the way they support certain relations rather than natural
development of human progress contingent events like king die, earthquake
Provides an alternative method of critique – can undermine the apparent legitimacy of
a concept by revealing its contingent and functional history
Foucault applies to madness, punishment, sexuality, education
4
Lecture 1 – PP
Power
1. Why power?
Who should have political power? (which individual/groups etc.)
- Democracy, separation of powers (judicary, executive government, parlement)
How should power be distributed?
- Justice, equality
What constitutes abuse of power?
When is this harmful?
- Corruption, bribery, coercion, bias
- Concerned when decisions, actions influenced by powers
Care about power in three contexts (Moriss):
Practical what you can bring about, what others can do
Moral relevant for ascribing responsibility – must have power to be blameworthy
Evaluative forming groups means I gain certain powers, but also become subject
to power of others. We can evaluate societies in terms of the power they grant
individuals to control one’s life
important then, to identify power – thus, we need to know what it is
Cases of power? – voorbeelden met power
- While the majority voted against the Intelligence and Security Services Act 2017 (March
2018), the referendum was non-binding and the public has no power to change the law
- The media repeatedly emphasized that the main issues surrounding Brexit were about
sovereignty and immigration
- Richard Thaler: “..but I think most of us would rather..have our kids be well educated..” (dit
geeft dan dus aan dat er zo over het algemeen wordt gedacht, meeste vinden dit)
A. Luke’s Three dimensions
1. One-dimensional
- Power as prevailing in decision making (macht als overheersende factor in decision making)
- ‘A has power over B to the extent that he can get B to do something that B would not
otherwise do’ (Robert Dahl)
E.g. managers (deze kunnen je bijvoorbeeld ontslaan als je het niet doet, zij hebben
deze macht dus)
- Mechanism: coercion
Authority, personality, control of resources of uncertainty
- Young: powerlessness as one dimension of oppression (onderdrukking)
Non-professionals take orders and rarely give them, unable to decide on conditions of
work, little/no work autonomy, unable to exercise judgement
Deze hebben dus totaal geen power
- Problems
Ignores why some issues relevant, and how people come to have preferences
Subject to Dowding’s ‘blame fallacy’
Blame Fallacy
If power is capacity to intentionally control events to make something happen
And you want to measure who has power
1
, Look for who benefits to infer (om af te leiden) who has power
(decision-making procedure not always transparent)
Dowding – this inference (gevolgtrekking) is too quick!
- Those who benefit may be lucky rather than powerful
Blame Fallacy: concluding that the beneficiary must be exercising power
But, watch for the ‘systemically lucky’
- Some benefit as consequence of how society is structured
- E.g. capitalist routinely benefit as a consequence of politicians drive to ensure
strong economy
Coercion by authority
2. Two-dimensional
- Power as control of agenda
(+ one-dimension) – (Bachrach & Baratz)
Low levels also implicit
Decide whats get debated
E.g. Crenson on air pollution
- Would expect cities to devote comparable amount of time debating issue
- But, in some cities, the issue is only rarely discussed
- Cannot be described as issue of power given only one-dimensional account,
no conflict
- Crenson observed correlation with prominent industry (in deze steden onder tafel)
- Lukes – example of power to influence decision-making process
Power of non-decision-making
- Mechanism: manipulation
Selective information provision: media image, storytelling (presenting the case in
specific terms/language), shaping anticipated results, preventing tactics
Taboes maken zodat mensen er niet over praten, en conflict vermeden wordt
3. Three-dimensional
- Power as preference-shaping
(+ one and two dimensions)
Most effective/efficient use of power – affects what people want to do so as to
correspond to the interest of the powerful (beïnvloedt wat mensen willen doen om
overeen te stemmen met de belangen van de machtigen/mensen met power)
Prevents or precludes conflict (voorkomt of sluit conflicten uit)
- ‘the fight is won before it has even begun’ (Parvin)
Illusions (‘false consciousness’) that reinforce powerful interests (Lukes)
- Mechanism: domination
Articulating ideology, manufacturing consent, conformity, depoliticization
Ideology
- Multiple usages of term:
2
, i. A worldview (‘my ideology is…’ cf. ‘my philosophy is…’)
ii. An approach that is ‘doctrinaire’ (elements of partisanship, extremism, dogmatism,
impracitcality and detachment from real world (onvoorspelbaarheid en onthechting
van de echte wereld)
iii. The ‘end of ideology’ thesis (Fukuyama, Bell et al): elements of i. and ii.: no more
competing fundamentally different worldviews; in view of vindication of liberal
democracy, such disagreements put down to faults under ii
- Distinguish: pejorative/descriptive senses (Geuss)
- Focus here: pejorative
An idea associated with Marxism: roughly distortion of consciousness that occurs
because it serves certain interests… (vervorming van bewustzijn dat optreedt omdat
het bepaalde belangen dient)
Summary:
Baratz Bachrach Lukes Dahl
Cases of Power? – die eerder zijn besproken
- no one-dimensional power (bij referendum was non-binding)
- wel second-dimensional power (bij referendum)
Power-over; Power-to
- All three dimensions describe power-over
Getting someone else to do what you want them to do
Lukes 3 dimensions in general form:
‘A exercised power over B when A affects B in a manner contrary to B’s interests’
- Focus on power as domination, or power-over others reflects narrow (androcentric) interest
- What about power-to?
‘the ability of an individual actor to attain an end or series of ends’ (Allen 1998, p.34)
om een doel of een reeks doelen te bereiken
‘the human ability not just to act but to act in concert’ (Arendt 1970, p.44)
collectively dus gezamenlijk op te treden
Various feminists have emphasised something more like power to, e.g.
‘empowerment’ see e.g. Hartsock 1993, Held 1992
Self-develop for instance
Could think of power-over as species of power-to
2. Contested concept (omstreden concept)
3
, Some suggest Power is a contested concept:
- Explanation 1: different conceptions appropriate for different research contexts and
disciplines (conceptions = opvattingen)
- Explanation 2: our conceptions of power are shaped by power relations
Lukes: “How we may think about power may serve to reproduce and reinforce power
structures and relations, or alternatively it may challenge and subvert them. It may contribute
to their continued functioning, or it may unmask their principles of operation, whose
effectiveness is increased by their being hidden from view. To the extent that this is so,
conceptual and methodological questions are inescapably political and so what ‘power’
means is ‘essentially contested’” discuss who got power
Summary lecture 1
- Investigation of power requires understanding of what it is
- Lukes three-dimensional account
One dimensional: pravailing in decision making + blame fallacy
Two dimensional: agenda setting
Three dimensional: preference setting + ideology
- Power-over vs Power-to
- Essentially contested concept
For thought
What kinds of power are at work in your university education?
Do you think organizational culture can be a form of power?
Do you think your idea of what power is, is itself influenced by power?
Lecture 2 – PP
Power II
Introduction to Foucault
Michel Foucault
Not just shaping preferences and affecting behaviour, but shaping subjects, how to
make people a certain way
Power is ubiquitous – accompanies all social interaction
- Not a resource that people have, but feature of relations (build in the relationship)
- Not always bad (creates who we are), sometimes productive, but can be dangerous
can shape you in a way you don’t like
1. Genealogy
Genealogical method (contrast with conceptual analysis analyze everyday and define a
specific definition natural development of human progress)
History of a concept, practice, or norm that challenges the perceived naturalness of the
topic, or the idea that its evolution is the result of necessary and natural progress
Rather, a concept or idea is influenced by contingent events (random things that
happen), power, and the way they support certain relations rather than natural
development of human progress contingent events like king die, earthquake
Provides an alternative method of critique – can undermine the apparent legitimacy of
a concept by revealing its contingent and functional history
Foucault applies to madness, punishment, sexuality, education
4
