to establish whether a relationship exists between five sources of power and five .. In the last decade South Africa has experienced major changes, in particular. The application of these sources of power to the teacher-student relationship is well explained in this article: Schrodt, P., Whitt, P.L., and. In this context, power doesn't necessarily mean something ominous or threatening. There are many meanings and possible sources of power.
It is because of this action that power is unlikely to be detected that it remains elusive to 'rational' investigation. This milieu both artificial and natural appears as a target of intervention for power according to Foucault which is radically different from the previous notions on sovereignty, territory and disciplinary space inter woven into from a social and political relations which function as a species biological species.
He writes, "A body is docile that may be subjected, used, transformed and improved. Instead of using corporeal punishment in order to convince people to adhere to the laws of the day, Foucault says power becomes internalized during this period. Instead of watching someone be drawn and quartered in a public space, political power is exerted on individuals in a way that compels them to obey laws and rules on their own - without this show of force.
He builds on the ideas of Jeremy Bentham regarding the Panopticon in which prison inmates are compelled to behave and control themselves because they might be in the view of the prison guard.
The Role of Power in Relationships - Dr Michael Aaron
The physical shape of the Panopticon creates a situation in which the prison guard need not be present for this to happen, because the mere possibility of the presence of the guard compels the prisoners to behave.
Foucault takes this theory and makes it generalize to everyday life. He claims that this kind of surveillance is constant in modern society, and the populous at large enacts it. Therefore, everyone begins to control themselves and behave according to society's rules and norms. Feminist philosophers took up Foucault's ideas regarding docile bodies and applied them to the different ways men and women are socialized to use their bodies.
She also cites diet, exercise, and skin care, among other processes, as sites in which the feminine body is made docile. Clegg[ edit ] Stewart Clegg proposes another three-dimensional model with his "circuits of power"  theory. This model likens the production and organizing of power to an electric circuit board consisting of three distinct interacting circuits: These circuits operate at three levels, two are macro and one is micro.
The episodic circuit is the micro level and is constituted of irregular exercise of power as agents address feelings, communication, conflict, and resistance in day-to-day interrelations. The outcomes of the episodic circuit are both positive and negative.
The dispositional circuit is constituted of macro level rules of practice and socially constructed meanings that inform member relations and legitimate authority. The facilitative circuit is constituted of macro level technology, environmental contingencies, job design, and networks, which empower or disempower and thus punish or reward, agency in the episodic circuit.
All three independent circuits interact at "obligatory passage points" which are channels for empowerment or disempowerment. Galbraith[ edit ] JK Galbraith summarizes the types of power as being "condign" based on force"compensatory" through the use of various resources or "conditioned" the result of persuasionand their sources as "personality" individuals"property" their material resources and "organizational" whoever sits at the top of an organisational power structure.
Thus a political regime maintains power because people accept and obey its dictates, laws and policies. Sharp's key theme is that power is not monolithic; that is, it does not derive from some intrinsic quality of those who are in power. For Sharp, political power, the power of any state — regardless of its particular structural organization — ultimately derives from the subjects of the state.
His fundamental belief is that any power structure relies upon the subjects' obedience to the orders of the ruler s. If subjects do not obey, leaders have no power.
Rejecting instructive power is possible — rejecting destructive power is not.The Power of Relationship (Prayer that Produces Power)
By using this distinction, proportions of power can be analyzed in a more sophisticated way, helping to sufficiently reflect on matters of responsibility. This perspective permits to get over an "either-or-position" either there is power, or there isn'twhich is common especially in epistemological discourses about power theories,    and to introduce the possibility of an "as well as-position". The theory analyzes the culture of the powerful. The powerful comprise those people in society with easy access to resources, those who can exercise power without considering their actions.
The unmarked category can form the identifying mark of the powerful. The unmarked category becomes the standard against which to measure everything else. For most Western readers, it is posited that if a protagonist's race is not indicated, it will be assumed by the reader that the protagonist is Caucasian ; if a sexual identity is not indicated, it will be assumed by the reader that the protagonist is heterosexual ; if the gender of a body is not indicated, will be assumed by the reader that it is male ; if a disability is not indicated, it will be assumed by the reader that the protagonist is able bodied, just as a set of examples.
Power (social and political) - Wikipedia
One can often overlook unmarked categories. Whiteness forms an unmarked category not commonly visible to the powerful, as they often fall within this category. The unmarked category becomes the norm, with the other categories relegated to deviant status.
Social groups can apply this view of power to race, genderand disability without modification: Dual power leftist theory The term 'counter-power' sometimes written 'counterpower' is used in a range of situations to describe the countervailing force that can be utilised by the oppressed to counterbalance or erode the power of elites. A general definition has been provided by the anthropologist David Graeber as 'a collection of social institutions set in opposition to the state and capital: Making Change Happen,  put forward a theory that those disempowered by governments' and elite groups' power can use counterpower to counter this.
The righteousness of a cause can be its power.
Power - FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS, MARITAL RELATIONSHIPS
So when a couple is mired in conflict— when they are desperately trying to get their way or be right or prove the other person wrong— what it often comes down to is a power struggle. Think about the relationships in your own life. When you were a child, who had the power in the parent-child relationship? At your work when you interact with your boss, who has the power? If you are now a parent, who has the power in your relationship with your children? Love relationships do not escape this dynamic.
Lovers can say that they are completely equal, but to do so requires a mindful awareness of the role of power. For example, if one partner is denying sex to the other, is that an equal relationship? What role does power have in that dynamic? Who is exerting power in that situation? Is this perhaps the only form of power the individual has at his or her disposal? These are important questions to ask. If we are not mindful of the role of power in relationships, we miss an important opportunity to have an honest discussion about what is truly going on.
But the truth is if the partner who is denying sex in the situation above keeps pretending that he or she has a headache and ignoring the power struggle beneath the surface, the problem only snowballs to the point that the couple will find themselves so resentful that breaking up seems to be the only viable option. If people truly want to be transparent and honest in their relationships whichever kind of relationship it isthey need to be able to have a frank discussion about the role that power plays in that relationship.
Although he may not be considered an expert on Mexico outside the family, within the family he is. Reward power is the ability to influence others by providing physical and psychological benefits to those who comply with one's wishes.
- Power (social and political)
- The Role of Power in Relationships
- Different Sources of Power that Affect the Teacher-Student Relationship
With small children, parents often influence behavior with candy or sweets. With older children and adolescents, the price of power might be more expensive—a new outfit or bicycle. Adults in families often strike bargains, exchange pleasing behaviors, and "sweet talk" others to get their way. The power bases articulated by French and Raven are often unclear in actual families.
For example, if one family member has used coercion in the past, others may have learned that it is best to give in and keep their opinions to themselves. Although it may not be apparent to outsiders, those inside the family may feel coerced even though they do not signal their resistance in visible ways. Robert Blood and Donald Wolfe took a macrosystemic view when they presented their resource theory of family power.
That is, they looked for associations between power inside the family and power outside the family, and argued that power was apportioned between husbands and wives based on the relative resources that each contributed to the family. Blood and Wolfe specifically focused on the resources of income, occupational prestige, and educational attainment and, based on interviews with hundreds of white, middle-class wives in Detroit, Michigan, demonstrated that the greater the men's resources in these three areas, the greater the men's perceived power within the family.
The resource theory of family power was influential because the idea suggested that men do not become heads of households by divine right or natural biological processes, but because they have more and easier access to educational, financial, and occupational resources in society.
The idea suggested that opening up women's access to resources outside the family could result in a more evenly balanced distribution of power within the family. There has been considerable research support for resource theory in the United States and in Third World countries. Philip Blumstein and Pepper Schwartz conducted a study in the United States and found that when men made substantially more income than their wives, they were more likely to exert greater power in financial decision-making when compared with husbands that made about the same income as their wives.
A study conducted in Mexico by R. Oropesa found that wives with higher education were equal to their husbands in family power, felt more satisfaction with their influence in the family, and were less likely to be a victim of domestic violence. A study of nonindustrialized nations conducted by Gary Lee and Larry Petersen found that the more wives contributed to food production, the more power they exerted in marriage. There has also been substantial criticism of resource theory.
It has been pointed out that income, occupation, and education are only three among many resources that influence family power.
Edna Foa and U. Foa suggested that in addition to tangible resources such as money, education, and occupation, intangible resources such as intelligence, physical attractiveness, likeability, love, and comfort impact family power. Actually, any trait or behavior that is valued by others in the family can be a resource that is exchanged for influence and power.
For example, in immigrant families it has been observed that the ability to speak the host language can increase one's power if other family members depend on that ability to translate and interpret messages Alvarez Among the Fulani tribes of West Africa, who primarily practice the religion of Islam, family members, especially women, can increase their power in the family by practicing traditional Fulani customs of conjuring the spirits of dead ancestors and others who have passed on to the other world Johnson Most family scientists take a macrosystemic view, first articulated by Constantina Safilios-Rothschildthat the bases of family power are a reflection of culturally defined gender ideologies and gender-segregated resources in the wider society in which a family is embedded.
In practically all societies, this means that males have more power in families because of patriarchal beliefs about male authority. For example, a Gallup Poll conducted in twenty-two countries found that women are almost universally perceived as more emotional, talkative, and patient than men, whereas men are perceived as more aggressive, ambitious, and courageous than women.
Even though there may be little scientific justification for these perceptions, they exert a strong influence in favor of male dominance in families that might be diminished through women's resources, but not completely muted. Power Processes An examination of power processes reveals that getting one's way in the dynamic interaction of families entails an ongoing set of complex and subtle maneuvers involving communication, commitment, bargaining and negotiation, coalition formation, conflict and conflict resolution, and parenting styles.
Moreover, an examination of power processes reveals that in virtually all cultures, variables like the number of children and where the family lives make family power processes more complex. Willard Waller is credited with first articulating the idea that family power is sometimes affected by commitment: The principle of least interest states that in disputes involving power, the individual who is least interested in continuing the relationship usually has more power than the one who is more interested in continuing the relationship.
In dating relationships, the threat to break up can level the playing field of relative power. In some cases, an individual who feels "one-down" can make the threat and gain an equal footing if the other wants to stay together.
In worse cases, an individual who is already "one-up" can threaten to break up and gain an even stronger hand in future disputes. In marriage, the principle of least interest can involve threatening to divorce, or in parent-child relationships, by parents threatening to send a child to foster care, to boarding school, or to live with a relative. Children and adolescents sometimes invoke the principle of least interest by threatening to run away or, in cases where parents are divorced, by threatening to go live with the noncustodial parent.
In order to increase power, however, threats to leave must be feared by those one is threatening. Otherwise, they may say, "Go ahead and leave.
The principle of least interest applies mostly in societies where marriage is a free choice rather than arranged, and where it is possible for men and women to dissolve marriage through divorce. In many cultures, divorce is restricted by social and religious tyranny that makes personal selectivity in one's partner irrelevant to the establishment or continuation of marriage Swidler For example, in societies that are ruled by intolerant legalists or religionists, the courts might allow a husband to obtain a divorce simply because he has lost emotional interest in his wife or because she has done something of which he disapproves.
In the same society, a wife might not be granted a divorce even if she has legitimate reasons, such as her husband's abuse, desertion, criminal behavior, or, in polygamous societies, if he were to take another wife without the permission of the wife or wives he already has.
In these societies, family power processes are so structured along gender and generational lines that selectivity has little to do with the establishment and maintenance of marital and family relationships.