The Advantages of the Three-Dimensional View of Power - Essay Example

? Steven Lukes and Weber’s Definition of Power, and the Advantages of the Three-Dimensional View of Power according To Lukes Steven Lukes and Weber’s Definition of Power, and the Advantages of the Three-Dimensional View of Power according To Lukes Many people have come up with varying definitions of power, with each person having various points of focus. Though they could dwell on the same point, they explain it in different ways. This has caused critics in light of their differences, with each person trying to extrapolate on the basis of the explanation. Renowned academicians have had their fair share on critics on each other especially in reflection to power and control of the people that are involved (Gidden, 2010). For instance, Marx Weber states that power is a resource that should be utilized in the world. He defines power as a resource that some people have at the expense of other people that do not have. In such a circumstance, people have to take power from others and control other resources. The other people that do not have power have little or no control as they do not have the discrepancy as such. According to Marx Weber, power is defined by a few people that are in control. Steven Lukes steps in to criticize power in a more radical way. He states that power is a continuous exercise which involves two different parties. While some parties will have power, the other parties do not have power to control the people that have power. According to Lukes, a single party will exercise power and use the power to gain control over some issues. In such a situation, the other party does not have control. There will be a divergence of interests as the party with power will exercise the power contrary to the interests of the other party. At times, the party that does not have power will be aware of this, while at other times, the other party will not have a clue as to the actions of the party that is in power. Steven Lukes criticizes power in stating that it has three faces (Gidden, 2010). In the first face, Lukes states that the parties make a mutual decision as they are participatory. Though they are involved in making the decisions, they are only allowed to participate to a certain extent, as their interests have to be catered for. Since they are both involved in the decision making process, their interests are guaranteed. However, this depends on the bodies that are in power as they have the overall power on the decisions that are made. This creates an all inclusive scenario where all the parties that have interests are engaged in decision making. The second face as stated by Lukes is that, there are instances on non-decision. In such a scenario, the people in power set up an agenda where they have control of the decisions that will be made. Part of their agenda is to create a scenario where decisions will not be reached. Certain decisions will never be reached, despite any effort from the people that have lesser control and power. In such a position, the interests of the people that do not have power are jeopardized. Therefore, the people in power have a leeway of making decisions on behalf of other people (Gidden, 2010). This is absolutely done to ensure the people in power have their interests at hand. The people that do not have power have their interests at stake as they will never reach to a decision that will protect their interests. The third face as explained by Lukes states that decisions are made according to the interests of the masses. People in power make decisions so that they can cater for a whole community of the people. This is a contrary opinion which is a critique against Weber’s definition of power. In such a scenario, the people in power make decisions which are inclusive of the interests of all the other people. The desires of everyone are included in the decision making. Though the people in power make such decisions to please everyone else, their interests are also protected. Therefore, these decisions are not made to please an individual but are made to please the whole community or social group. There are several advantages that are explained from the three dimensions of power as explained by Steven Lukes (Gidden, 2010). First, he states that there is effectiveness in decision making when the power to make decisions is in the jurisdiction of a few people in control. When the power to make decisions is in the hands of a few individuals, they are likely to consider a certain criteria that will develop a better decision. This creates a scenario where critical decisions are made in the meanest time. Similarly, the decisions that are made are effective as they focus on the interests of all the involved parties. As such, the decisions will benefit the whole society as they are executed and made at the right time. The second advantage is that the people involved in decision making focus on behavior in decision making. This is blatantly expressed as the people who make the decision focus on key and critical areas, which includes behavior. Focusing on the behavior of the people that make decisions puts the whole society at a better place. Therefore, the people that make the decisions are selected in light of their behavior. Most of the people with acceptable behaviors will take positive political actions, especially in decision making. Thirdly, focusing on three dimensions of power is an advantage as it focuses on key conflicts that could arise when a certain decision is made (Gidden, 2010). There are number of issues that could arise if some decisions are made by the people in power. The interests of a certain group could be jeopardized if the decision is executed at some point. Therefore, it is better to make an agenda which will prevent any decision making, which in the long run will affect part of the community. In such a point, it benefits the whole community as a single part of the community will not be at peace while the other part languishes in dire consequences. As a fact, these decisions are made with constant focus on the current issues, and any other issues that could arise in future. Therefore, the people in power find it prudent to maintain the status quo in such times. Lastly, Lukes’ three dimensions of power have an advantage in that observable points of conflict are included in decision making. If there is a future conflict in the same line, the people in power will focus on a decision that will avert any issue that could arise. This creates a scenario where all the parties continue indulging in decision making process to reach at a compromising situation. This will include all interests of the parties that are involved. In the end, the decision that is made will be appreciated by both parties. Reference Giddens, A. (2010). Sociology: Introductory readings. London: Polity. Read More