Power: Practical Foundation of Educational Management & Governance (2) 1 zMax Webers formal definition of power "In general, we understand by 'power' the chance of a man or of a number of men to realize their own will in a communal action even against the resistance of others who are participating in the action" (Weber, 1948, p.180) zThe constituents of the concept of power yA and B in interaction yAs will yB acts in compliance with As will even it is against Bs own will Max Webers Definitions of Power: The Origin of the Inquiry 2 3 Formal Definition of Power Actor A Actor B Realization of As will Against Bs 4 zRobert Dahls behavioralistic and pluralistic definition of power yDahls definition of power: "A has power over B to the extent that he can get B to do something B would not otherwise do" (Dahl, 1957, p. 203) yThe analogy of billiard ball and example of traffic policeman yDahls conception of political community as polyarchy and pluralism Different Perspectives of Power 5 zDenis Wrongs conception of power of intention yWrong defines power as the capacity of some persons to produce intended and foreseen effects on others. (Wrong, 1979, p.2) yAdditional constituents Wrong inserted in the concept of power xIntentionality in power xEffectiveness of power Different Perspectives of Power 6 zDenis Wrongs conception of power of intention yWrongs distinction between intended and unintended influences x Dominant and overprotective mother does not intend to feminize the character of her son x A boss does not mean to plunge an employee into despair by greeting him somewhat distractedly x A woman does not mean to arouse a mans sexual interest by paying polite attention to his conversation in a cocktail party Different Perspectives of Power 7 zBachrach & Baratzs thesis on Two Faces of Power (1962) yCriticism on Dahl pluralistic decision making thesis yDistinction between power of decision making and non-decision making xA non-decision making situation refers to "A devotes his energies to creating or reinforcing social and political process to public consideration of only those issues which are comparatively innocuous to A. In this way, they suggest, B is hindered in raising issues which may be detrimental to As preferences. (Clegg, 1989, p. 76) Different Perspectives of Power 8 zBachrach & Baratzs thesis on Two Faces of Power (1962) yMechanism of non-decision making in organization xMobilization of bias and non-issue xRule of Anticipated reaction xNegative decision-making Different Perspectives of Power 9 Potential cause for B to formulate a grievance Not formulatedFormulated Mobilization of bias Not articulated Anticipated reaction Articulated Not resolved Resolved Negative Decision-making Decision RefusedAccepted 10 zSteven Lukes defines the concept of power by saying that A exercises power over B when A affects B in a manner contrary to Bs interests. In this definition the notion of interests is given a significant and evaluative position. (Lukes, 2005, p. 37) Accordingly Lukes differentiates power into three dimensions. Different Perspectives of Power 11 zLukes three dimensions of power and the radical approach y1 st dimension of power: It involves "a focus on behaviour in the making of decisions on issues over which there is an observable conflict of interest, seen as express policy preferences, revealed by political participation" (Lukes, 2005, p.19). This dimension of power assumes a liberal ontological position, which "takes man as they are and applies want-regarding principles to them, relating their interests to what they actually want or prefer, to their policy preferences as manifested by their political participation." (2005, p.37) Different Perspectives of Power 12 zLukes three dimensions of power and the radical approach y2 nd dimension of power: It involves "consideration of the ways in which decisions are prevented from being taken on potential issues over which there is an observable conflict of interests, seen as express policy preferences and sub-political grievances." (p. 25) This dimension of power assumes a reformist ontological position in "seeing and deploring that not all men's wants are given equal weight by the political system, also relates their interest to what they want or prefer, but allows that this may be revealed in more indirect and sub-political ways in the form of deflected, submerged or concealed wants and preferences." (p.37) Different Perspectives of Power 13 zLukes three dimensions of power and the radical approach y3rd dimension of power: It assumes a radical ontological position, in which people in subordination and their real interest hampered or may not express or even be conscious of their interest. (p. 28) That is because people's wants may themselves be a product of a system which works against their interests, and in such cases, relates the latter to what they would want and prefer, were they able to make the choice." (p. 37) Hence, this dimension of power set out to theorize and evaluate actual behavior by revealing models of what people would do if they knew what their real interests were. Different Perspectives of Power 14 zDebates on Lukes' three-dimensional conception of power yDebate on the notion of real interest xBradshaw suggests that Lukes has confused choices of preferences of autonomous individuals with 'real interests' (1976, quoted in Clegg, 1989, p.94). It is difficult to distinctively differentiate the two, especially in cases of substantiating individuals autonomous choice is not of her real interest or her non-preference is of her real interest. xWall's example of heroin addicts choice to continue taking the drug (1975, quoted, Clegg, 1989, p.95) or smokers, etc. Different Perspectives of Power 15 zDebates on Lukes' three-dimensional conception of power yTed Bentons criticism on Lukes conception of the unconscious real interest of the dominated xBenton queries that the judgment as to which class of wants, preferences, choices, etc. do constitute the interests of an actor who is subjects to an exercise of power has to be made by the external observer, or analyst on behalf of the actor. The judgment that has to be made is how the actor would feel or behave under conditions which do not now hold, and may be never have, nor ever will hold. No matter how well-intentioned the observer, this is still other-ascription of interest and not self-ascription. (1981, p. 167) Different Perspectives of Power 16 yTed Bentons criticism on Lukes conception of the unconscious real interest of the dominated xBenton's concept of paradox of emancipation In its simplest form this is the problem of how to reconcile a conception of socialist practice as a form of collective self-emancipation with a critique of the established order which holds that the consciousness of those from whom collective self-emancipation is to be expected is systematically manipulated, distorted and falsified by essential features of the order. If the autonomy of subordinate groups (classes) is to be respected then emancipation is out of the question; whereas if emancipation is to be brought about, it cannot be self- emancipation. I shall refer to this problem as the paradox of emancipation. (Benton 1981, p.162) Different Perspectives of Power 17 zDebates on Lukes' three-dimensional conception of power yGaventas mechanism of the 3 rd dimension of power xApathy or fatalism xUnderdevelopemnt of political consciousness xPolitical consciousness having been disorganized chronically and/or systemically Different Perspectives of Power 18 19 Foucaults Studies of Power ( ) 20 zFoucaults conception of power Power must be understood in the first instance (1) as the multiplicity of force relations immanent in sphere in which they operate and which constitute their own organization; (2) as the process which, through ceaseless struggles and confrontations, transforms, strengthens, or reverse them; (3) as the support which these force relations find in one another, thus forming a chain or a system, or on the contrary, the disjunctions and contradictions which isolate them form one another; and lastly, (4) as the strategies in which they take effect, whose general design or institutional crystallization is embodied in the state apparatus, in the formulation of the law, in the various social hegemonies. (1978/90, Pp ) Foucaults Studies of Power 21 Technology of Power zThe general theme of Foucaults studies of power: The subject yI would like to say, first of all, what has been the goal of my work during the last twenty years. It has not been to analyze the phenomena of power, nor to elaborate the foundations of such an analysis. My objective, instead, has been to create a history of the different mode by which, in our culture, human being are made subjects... Thus it is not power, but the subject, which is the general them of my research. (1982, ) Foucaults Studies of Power 22 23 zThe general theme of Foucaults studies of power: The subject yMy work has dealt with three modes of objectification which transform human being into subjects. (1982, p. 208) xThe first of the modes of inquiry which try to give themselves the status of sciences for example, the objectification of the speaking subject in grammaire generale, philology and linguistics;.... the objectification of the productive subject, the subject who labors, in the analysis of wealth and economics;..... the objectification of the sheer fact of being alive in natural history and biology. (p. 208) (The most representative work is The Order of Things: An Archaeology of Human Sciences, 1966) Foucaults Studies of Power 24 Foucaults Studies of Power 25 zThe general theme of Foucaults studies of power: The subject yMy work has dealt with three modes of objectification which transform human being into subjects. (1982, p. 208) xIn the second part of my work, I have studied the objectivizing of the subject in what I shall call dividing practices....Examples are the mad and the sane, the sick and the healthy, the criminals and the good boys. (p. 208) (The representative works are Madness and civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason, 1961; The Birth of the Clinic: An Archaeology of Medical Perspective, 1963; Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, 1975) Foucaults Studies of Power 26 Foucaults Studies of Power 27 zThe general theme of Foucaults studies of power: The subject yMy work has dealt with three modes of objectification which transform human being into subjects. (1982, p. 208) xFinally, I have sought to study...the way a human being turns him or herself into a subject....I have chosen the domain of sexuality - how men have learn to recognize themselves as subjects of sexuality. (p. 208) (History of Sexuality, vol. 1-3, are of course the representative works) Foucaults Studies of Power 28 Foucaults Studies of Power 29 zFoucaults typology of power: In Foucaults studies of power, four conceptions of power may be found: yDisciplinary power yBiopower yPastoral power ySovereign power Foucaults Studies of Power 30 zDisciplinary Power: Technology of the body and power (Discipline and Punish: The Birth of Prison, 1977/75) yThe project of docility: In every society, the body was in the grip of very strict power, which imposed on it constraints, prohibition or obligations. Docility joins the analyzable body (intelligible body) with the manipulatable body (useful body). (1979/75, p. 136) Foucaults Studies of Power 31 zDisciplinary Power: yDisciplinary power as techniques on manipulatable and useful body: Foucault has specified a list of techniques of disciplinary power, which made possible the meticulous control of the operations of body, which assured the constant subjection of its forces and imposed upon then a relation of docility-utility. (1979/75, p. 137) Foucaults Studies of Power 32 zDisciplinary Power: yDisciplinary power as techniques on manipulatable and useful body: They include xThe art of distributions xThe control of activity xThe organization of geneses xComposition of forces xTo sum up, it might be said that discipline creates out of the bodies it controls four types of individuality: it is cellular (by the play of spatial distribution), it is organic (by the coding of activities), it is genetic (by the accumulation of time), it is combinatory (by the composition of forces). (Foucault, 1977, p.167) Foucaults Studies of Power 33 zDisciplinary Power: yDisciplinary power as training on analyzable and intelligible body xThe chief function of disciplinary power is to train. Instead of bending all its subjects into a single uniform mass, it separates, analyses, differentiates, carries its procedures of decomposition to the point of necessary and sufficient single units. It trains the moving, confused, useless multitude of bodies and forces into a multiplicity of individual elements small, separate cells, organic autonomies, genetic identities and continuities, combinatory segments. Discipline makes individuals. (Foucault, 1977, p.170) Foucaults Studies of Power 34 zDisciplinary Power: yDisciplinary power as training on analyzable and intelligible body xThe success of disciplinary power derives from the use of simple instruments: (1) hierarchical observation; (2) normalizing judgement and their combination in a procedure that is specific to it, (3) examination. (Foucault, 1977, p.170; my numbering) Foucaults Studies of Power 35 zDisciplinary Power: yDisciplinary power in the Panoptic on: The self-surveillant body xBentham's Panopticon is the architectural figure .. We know the principle on which is was based: at the periphery, an annular building; at the centre, a tower; this tower is pierced with wide windows that open onto the inner side of the ring; peripheric building is divided into cells, each of which extends the whole width of the building; they have two windows, one on the inside, corresponding to the windows of the tower; the other, on the outside, allows the light to cross the cell from one end to the other. All that is needed, then is to place a supervisor in the central tower and to shut up in each cell a madman, a patient, a condemned man a worker or a schoolboys. By the effect of blacklighting, one can observe from the tower, standing out precisely against the light, the small captive showers in the cells of the periphery. . Visibility is a trap." (Foucault, 1977, p. 200) Foucaults Studies of Power 36 37 38 zDisciplinary Power: yDisciplinary power in the Panoptic on: The self-surveillant body xThe major effect of the Panopticon: to induce in the inmate a state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power. So to arrange things that the surveillance is permanent in its effects, even if it is discontinuous in its action; that the perfection of power should tend to render its actual exercise unnecessary; that is architectural apparatus should be a machine for creating and sustaining a power relation independent of the person who exercises it; in short, that the inmate should be caught up in a power situation of which they are themselves the bearers. (, p. 201) Foucaults Studies of Power Distinction between A and B practically vanished 39 zBiopower: Power/Knowledge on Life (History of Sexuality, Vol. 1, 1978/76) yThe institutionalization of biopower "Starting in the seventeenth century, this power over life involved in two basic forms: One of these poles centered on the body as a machine: its disciplining, the optimization of its capabilities, the extortion of its forces, the parallel increase of its usefulness and its docility, its integration into systems of efficient and economic controls, all this was ensured by the procedures of power that characterized the disciplines: an anatomo- politics of the human body. Foucaults Studies of Power 40 zBiopower: yThe institutionalization of biopower "Starting in the seventeenth century, this power over life involved in two basic forms: The second, somewhat later, focused on the species body, the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes: propagation, birth and mortality, the level of health, life expectancy and longevity, with all the conditions that can cause these to vary. Their supervision was effected through an entire series of interventions and regulatory controls: a bio-politics of the population." (Foucault, 1978, p.139) Foucaults Studies of Power 41 zBiopower: yThe institutionalization of biopower x"During the classical period (i.e. 17th century)there was the emergence in the field of political practices and economic observation, of the problems of birthrate, longevity, public health, housing, and migration. Hence, there was an explosion of numerous and diverse techniques for subjugation of bodies and the control of populations, marking the beginning of an era of 'biopower'". (Foucault, 1978, p. 140) Foucaults Studies of Power 42 zBiopower: yThe institutionalization of biopower xThe concept of biopower: "Power would no longer be dealing simply with legal subjects over whom the ultimate domination was death, but with living beings, and the mastery it would be able to exercise over them would have to be applied at the level of life itself; it was the taking charge of life, more than the threat of death, that gave power its access even to the body. If one can apply the term bio-history to the pressure through which the movement of life and the processes of history interfere with one another, one would have to speak of bio-power to designate what brought life and its mechanism into the realm of explicit calculations and made knowledge/power an agent of transformation of human life." (Foucault, 1978, p , original italic) Foucaults Studies of Power 43 zBiopower: yThe constitution of sexuality and the power/knowledge on life xSex become a political issue and subject to power: It is within the historical context of the institutionalization of biopower, it "enable us to understand the importance assumed by sex as a political issue." (Foucault, 1978, p.145) That is because "sex was a means of access both to life of the body and the life of the species." (Foucault, 1978, p. 146) "At the juncture of the 'body' and the 'population', sex became a crucial target of a power organized around the management of life rather that the menace of death." (Foucault, 1978, p.147) Foucaults Studies of Power 44 zBiopower: yThe constitution of sexuality and the power/knowledge on life xThe constitution of sexuality: "Through the themes of health, progeny, race, the future of the species, the vitality of the social body, power spoke of sexuality and to sexuality; the latter was not a mark or a symbol, it is an object and a target." (Foucault, 1978, p. 147) As a result, sexuality has gradually developed into the norm, knowledge, life, meaning, the disciplines and the regulations." (Foucault, 1978, p. 148) It is in this conjunction of power and knowledge (i.e. power/knowledge) that sexuality can be understood as "the correlative of that slowly developed discursive practice which constitutes the scientia sexualis." (Foucault, 1978, p.68) Foucaults Studies of Power 45 zPastoral power: From confessional to modern-state apparatuses ySince the Middle Ages at least, Western societies have established the confession as one of the main ritual we rely on for the production of truth, with the resulting development of confessional techniques. The confession became one of the Wests most highly valued techniques for producing truth. Western man has become a confessing animal. (Foucault, 1978, p ) Foucaults Studies of Power 46 zPastoral power: yThe confession is a ritual of discourse in which the speaking subject is also the subject of the statement; it is also a ritual that unfold within a power relationship, for one does not confess without the presence (or virtual presence) of a partner who is not simply the interlocutor but the authority who requires the confession, prescribe and appreciates it, and intervenes in order to judge, punish, forgive, console, and reconcile. By virtue of the power structure immanent in it, the confessional discourse cannot come from above, through the sovereign will of a master, but rather from below, as obligatory act of speech which under some imperious compulsion, break the bonds of discretion or forgetfulness. The agency of domination does not reside in the one speak, but in the one who listens and says nothing, not in the one who knows and answers, but in the one who questions and is not supposed to know. (Foucault, 1978, 61-62) Foucaults Studies of Power 47 zPastoral power: yThe concept of pastoral power: Confessional discourse as part of the institution of Christianity, it has espoused "a very special form of power", which Foucault called "pastoral power." Foucaults Studies of Power 48 zPastoral power: yThe concept of pastoral power: It is made up of the following features. (Foucault, 1982, P. 214) x"It is a form of power whose ultimate aim is to assure individual salvation in the next world." x"Pastoral power is not merely a form of power which commands; it must also be prepared to sacrifice itself for the life and salvation of the flock." x"It is a form of power which does not look after just the whole community, but each individual in particular, during his entire life." xFinally, this form of power cannot be exercised without knowing the inside of people's mind, without exploring their souls, without making them reveal their innermost secrets. It implies a knowledge of the individual himself." Foucaults Studies of Power 49 zPastoral power: yTwo aspect of pastoral power: xThe ecclesiastical institutionalization aspect: This aspect of pastoral power, according to Foucault's analysis, "has ceased or at least lost its vitality since the eighteenth century." (Foucault, 1982, p. 214) xThe functional aspect: Foucault contends that the function of pastoral power, has spread and multiplied outside the ecclesiastical institution." Foucault underlines that it is the state, which has become "a new form of pastoral power." (Foucault, 1982, p. 215) Foucaults Studies of Power 50 zPastoral power: yInstitutionalization of pastoral power in the modern state: Since the eighteenth century, functions of pastoral power have gradually been transferred from the Church to the state. Therefore, "we can see the state as a modern matrix of indiviudalization, or a new form of pastoral power. (1982, p. 215) xIn the context of this new form of pastoral power of the state, "the word salvation takes on different meanings, health, well- being (that is, sufficient wealth, standard of living), security, protection against accident. A series of 'worldly' aims took the place of the religious aims of the traditional pastorate." (Foucault, 1982, p. 215) As in the state project of establishment of mass education for all its future citizens, it can be construed as a new form of salvation to literacy, civil army and productive labor force. Foucaults Studies of Power 51 zPastoral power: yInstitutionalization of pastoral power in the modern state: x"Concurrently the officials of pastoral power increased. Some times this form of power was exerted by state apparatus or, in any case, by a public institution such as the police." (Foucault, 1982, p. 215) In the case of education, it is evidenced in the development of public schooling systems and implementation of compulsory education policy in European countries in the eighteenth to nineteenth centuries. Foucaults Studies of Power 52 zPastoral power: yInstitutionalization of pastoral power in the modern state: x"Finally, the multiplication of the aims and agents of pastoral power focused the development of knowledge of man around two roles: one, globalizing and quantitative, concerning the population; the other, analytical, concerning the individual." (Foucault, 1982, p. 215) The establishment of the knowledge and field of study of education since the eighteenth century signified the emergence and development of the knowledge/power (i.e. discourse) around the pastoral power of education. Furthermore, the field of education has accordingly differentiated, as Foucault indicated, into areas of studies focusing on knowledge globalizing aspect of pastoral power, such as education policy and planning, economics of education, etc.; and areas of studies emphasizing the analytical and individualizing aspect of pastoral power, such as psychology of education, curriculum and instruction, etc. Foucaults Studies of Power 53 zSovereign power and the subject of rights and liberty (Two Lectures, 1994/77; and The Final Foucault, 1988) yTwo approaches to power: Disciplinary power vs. sovereignty power (power of law) Foucaults Studies of Power 54 55 zSovereign power yTwo approaches to power: I believe that the process which has really rendered the discourse of the human sciences possible is the juxtaposition, the encounter between two lines of approach, two mechanisms, two absolutely heterogeneous types of discourse: on the one hand there is the reorganization of right that invests sovereignty, and on the other, the mechanics of the coercive forces whose exercise takes a disciplinary form. And I believe that in our own times power is exercise simultaneously through these courses, to which the disciplines give rise, invade the area of right so that the procedure of normalization come to be ever more constantly engaged in the colonization of those of law. I believe that all this can explain the global functioning of what I would call a society of normalization. (1994/76, p.44) Foucaults Studies of Power 56 zSovereign power yThe historical development of the juridical-political theory of sovereignty and the rule of rights in Western societies xSovereign power of feudal monarchy and the rights of the King: In Western societies since medieval times it has been royal power that has provided the essential focus around which legal thought has been elaborated. It is in response to the demands of royal power, for its profit and to serve as its instrument or justification, that the juridical edifice of our own society has been developed. Right in the West is the Kings right.... Foucaults Studies of Power 57 zSovereign power yThe historical development of the juridical-political theory of sovereignty and the rule of rights in Western societies x...And when this legal edifice escapes in latter century from the control of the monarch, when, more accurately, it is turned against that control, it is always the limits of this sovereign power that are put in question, its prerogatives that are challenged....When it comes to the general organization of the legal system in the West, it is essentially with the King, his rights, his power and its eventual limitations, that one is dealing. (1994/76, p ) Foucaults Studies of Power 58 zSovereign power yDemocratized sovereign power and the rights of the public: This mechanism of power and theory of rights, according to Foucault, were invoked along two lines of developments undertaken in Western societies. x"It has been, in the eighteenth and again in the nineteenth century, a permanent instrument of criticism of the monarchy and of all the obstacles that can thwart the development of disciplinary society (p ) Foucaults Studies of Power 59 zSovereign power yDemocratized sovereign power and the rights of the public: xAt the same time, the theory of sovereignty, and the organization of a legal code centered upon it, have allowed a system to be superimposed upon the mechanism of discipline in such a way as to conceal its actual procedures, the element of domination inherent in its techniques, and to guarantee to everyone, by virtue of the sovereignty of the State, the exercise of his proper sovereign rights. (p. 43) Foucaults Studies of Power 60 zSovereign power yFoucaults final words on the relationship between power and freedom xThe inherent relationship between power and freedom: In order to exercise a relation of power, there must be on both sides at least a certain form of liberty. Even though the relation of power may be completely unbalanced or when one can truly say that he has all power over the other, a power can only be exercised over another to the extent that the latter still has the possibility of committing suicide, of jumping out of the window or of killing the other. That means that in the relations of power, there is necessarily the possibility of resistance, for if there were no possibility of resistance...there would be no resistance of power....If there are relations of power throughout every social field it is because there is freedom everywhere. (1988, p. 12) Foucaults Studies of Power 61 zSovereign power yFoucaults final words on the relationship between power and freedom xThe liberating-dominating nature of power: Power is not an evil. Power is strategic games....Let us...take something that has been the object of criticism, often justified: the pedagogical institution. I dont see where evil is in the practice of someone who, in a given game of truth, knowing more than another, tells him what he must do, teaches him, transmits knowledge to him, communicates skills to him. The problem is rather to know how you are to avoid in these practices where power cannot not play and where it is no evil in itself the effects of domination which will make a child subject to the arbitrary and useless authority of a teacher, or put a student under the power of an abusively authoritarian professor, and so forth.... Foucaults Studies of Power 62 zSovereign power yFoucaults final words on the relationship between power and freedom xThe liberating-dominating nature of power: x"...We must distinguish the relationships of power as strategic game between liberties strategic games that result in the fact that some people try to determine the conduct of others and the states of domination, which are what we ordinary call power. And between the two, between the games of power and the states of domination, you have governmental technologies. (Pp ) Foucaults Studies of Power 63 zSovereign power yFoucaults final words on the relationship between power and freedom xThe notion of governmentality: In the idea of governmentality, I am aiming at the totality of practices, by which one can constitute, define, organize, institutionalize the strategies which individuals in their liberty can have in regard to each other. It is free individuals who try to control, to determine, to delimit the liberty of others, and in order to do that, they dispose of certain instruments to govern others. That rests indeed on freedom, on the relationship of self to self and the relationship to the other. But if you try to analyze power not from the point of view of liberty, of strategies and of governmentality but from the point of view of a political institution, you cannot consider the subject as a subject of rights. (1988, Pp ) Foucaults Studies of Power 64 zIn recent years a number of scholars have redefined the A-over-B conception of power in a number of fashions. Recent Revisions of Conception of Power: Dialectic nature of Power Relation 65 66 zSteven Lukes revision of his radical view on power: yLukes admits that the definition of the underlying concept of power offered in PRV (Power: A Radical View, 1974) is, plainly, entirely unsatisfactory in several respects. One of these respect is that it equates such dependence-inducing power with domination, assuming that A affects B in a manner contrary to Bs interest. thereby neglecting what we have seen to be the manifold ways in which power over others can be productive, transformative, authoritative and compatible with dignity. (Lukes, 2005, p. 109) Recent Revisions of Conception of Power: Dialectic nature of Power Relation 67 zSteven Lukes revision of his radical view on power: yLukes specifically quoted Charles Taylor to substantiate his assertion. Charles Taylor has helped to clarify this essential point. If some external agency or situation wreaks some change in me that in no way lies athwart some such desire/purpose/aspiration/interest, then there is no call to speak of an exercise of power/domination. Take the phenomenon of imprinting. In human life, it also exist after a fashion. We generally come to like the foods that have assuaged our hunger, those we are fed as children in our culture. Is this an index of the domination of our culture over us? The world would lose all useful profile, would have no more distinctiveness, if we let it roam this wide. (Lukes, 2005, Pp ) Recent Revisions of Conception of Power: Dialectic nature of Power Relation 68 zJohn Scotts conception of signification and legitimation bases of power (2001) Scott indicates that apart from coercive force or political manipulation, power can be constituted by means of persuasive influence, which depends on arguments, appeals and reasons that cause subaltern (in a power relation) to believe that it is appropriate to act in one way rather than another....This may involve a commitment to or recognition of ideas or values that are accepted as beyond question, as providing intrinsically appropriate reasons for acting. Recent Revisions of Conception of Power: Dialectic nature of Power Relation 69 zJohn Scotts conception of signification and legitimation bases of power (2001) Bases of this form of power have been differentiated by Scott into ySignification: The compliance of B (i.e. the subaltern) in a power relation is induced by the fact that a subaltern accepts the expertise of the system of knowledge or cognitive symbol of A. yLegitimation: Bs compliance is subscribed to the value and/or normative systems of a particular social or cultural context in which B has identified with. Recent Revisions of Conception of Power: Dialectic nature of Power Relation 70 71 zThe legacy of Webers conception of power: For a century, the theoretical discourse of power (as discussed above) has been dominated by Webers coercive concept of power, i.e. the chance and capacity of fulfilling ones will in a social relationship against the opposition of ones partners. Habermas Concept of Communicative Power 72 zHabermas distinction between coercive and communicative power: In a review essay on Hannah Arendts communicative concept of power(Habermas, 1977), Habermas suggests yMax Weber takes the teleological model of action as his point of departure: an individual subject ( or a group that can be regard as an individual) chooses the appropriate means to realize a goal that it has set for itself. Goal-attainment or success consists in bringing about a state in the world that fulfills the goal in question. To the extent that his success depends on the behavior of another subject, the actor must have at his disposal the means to instigate the other to the desired behavior. Weber calls his disposition over means to influence the will of another power. As Weber puts it: Power means every chance within a social relationship to assert ones will even against opposition. (Habermas, 1977, P. 3-4) Habermas Concept of Communicative Power 73 zHabermas distinction between coercive and communicative power: Habermas suggests yHannah Arendt starts from another model of action, the communicative: Power corresponds to the human ability not just act but to act in concert. Power is never the property of an individual; it belongs to a group and remain in existence only so long as the group keeps together. When we say of somebody that he is in power we actually refer to his being empowered by a certain number of people to act in their name. The fundamental phenomenon of power is not the instrumentalization of anothers will, but the formation of a common will in a communication directed to reach agreement. (Habermas, 1977, P. 4) Habermas Concept of Communicative Power 74 zRelationship between communicative power and communicative rationality yHabermas further asserts that the condition for the constitution of communicative power rests only on the undistorted communicative-rational actions. In his own words, A communicative powercan develop only in undeformed public spheres: it can issue only form structures of undamaged intersubjectivity found in undistorted communication. It arises where opinion- and will-formation instantiate the productive force of the enlarged mentality given with the unhindered communicative freedom each one has to make public use of ones reason at every point. This enlargement is accomplished by comparing our judgment with the possible rather than the actual judgments of others and by putting ourselves in the place of any other man. (Habermas, 1996, P. 148) Habermas Concept of Communicative Power 75 zRelationship between communicative power and communicative rationality yBy locating communicative power within his theoretical framework of communicative action, communicative rationality, public sphere, and lifeworld (1984; 1987; 1989; and 1996); Habermas has given the concept of communicative power a much wider scope. Communicative power can then be conceived as one of the organic components of the theory of communicative action. Habermas Concept of Communicative Power 76 77 zRelationship between communicative power and communicative rationality y.The three concepts: Communicative rationality, communicative action and communicative power form a tripod, within which action and power can be communicatively rationalized, rationality and power can be communicatively activated, and in turn both action and rationality can be communicatively empowered. Habermas Concept of Communicative Power 78 Communicative Rationality Communicative Action Communicative Power Rationalizing Activating Empowering zIn 1996, Habermas published another master piece of his, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, in which he presents his comprehensive framework of power. Habermass Conceptual Framework of Power 80 81 zThe conception of social power: I use the term social power as a measure for the possibilities an actor has in social relationships to assert his own will and interests, even against the opposition of others. Social power can both facilitate and restrict the formation of communicative power, though it does so differently than administrative power. Habermas, 1996, P. 175) Habermass Conceptual Framework of Power 82 zThe conception of social power: Accordingly the functions of social power may be differentiated into: yAs facilitative, the disposition over social power means that the necessary material conditions for an autonomous exercise of equal liberties and communicative freedoms are satisfied. In political bargaining, for example, the involved parties must be able to make their threats or promises credible in light of their social power. (1996, P. 175) Habermass Conceptual Framework of Power 83 zThe conception of social power: Accordingly the functions of social power may be differentiated into: . yAs restrictive, the disposition over social power provides some parties with a privileged opportunity to influence the political process in such a way that their interests acquire a priority not in accord with equal civil rights. Businesses, organizations, and pressure groups can, for example, transform their social power into political power by way of such interventions, whether they do so directly by influencing the administration or directly by manipulation public opinion. (1996, P. 175) Habermass Conceptual Framework of Power 84 zConceptions of political power, coercive power, administrative power & communicative power: yHabermas theory of the uncoupling of system and lifeworld xThe lifewold concept of society finds its strongest empirical foothold in archaic societies, where structures of linguistically mediated, normatively guided interaction immediately constitute the supporting social structure. (Habermas, 1987, p. 156) In this simple society, social coordination and integration are attained by social power, which are based on linguistically mediated communicative actions and values and norms constituted through communicative rationality. Habermass Conceptual Framework of Power 85 zConceptions of political power, coercive power, administrative power & communicative power: yHabermas theory of the uncoupling of system and lifeworld xAs human societies evolved from simple tribal societies to traditional societies, state mechanism first differentiated from linguistically medicated lifeworld and institutionalized into power-steered system. (Habermas, 1987, p ) At the beginning, the state power constituted in tribal societies could only be based on coercive power. By coercive power of the state, it refers to the constitution of the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory (Weber, 1948, P.78). It basically institutionalized one of the most fundamental conditions of the power-steering system of the state. Habermass Conceptual Framework of Power 86 From coercive power to administrative power: In traditional societies, the coercive power of the state were mainly built on sacred believes and traditions, such as the Church in Middle-Age Europe and the believe of power entrusted from heavenly order ( ) in ancient China. As the power holders of the traditional state began to calculate from strategic points of view and deploy a purposive- rational way, the new administrative power started to emerge. (Habermas, 1996, P. 137) In China, it witnessed the constitution of the huge and resilient bureaucracy of the literati or the mandarins, which operated on legal-rational base and secular tradition of Confucianism. (Weber, 1964) Habermass Conceptual Framework of Power 87 yPopular sovereignty and communicative power: As the sovereignty of the state of the monarch gave way to the popular sovereignty, the history of the past centuries witnessed the shift of the power bases of the modern state from coercive and administrative powers to communicative power. Habermas has built his thesis by the following four interlocking principles: Habermass Conceptual Framework of Power 88 yPopular sovereignty and communicative power: .. Habermas has built his thesis by the following four interlocking principles: xPrinciple of popular sovereignty: The principle of popular sovereignty states that all political power derives from the communicative power of citizens. The exercise of public authority is oriented and legitimated by the laws citizens give themselves in a discursively structured opinion- and will- formation. (Habermas, 1996, P. 170) Habermass Conceptual Framework of Power 89 yPopular sovereignty and communicative power: .. xPrinciple of guarantee comprehensive legal protection for each individual: Though communicative power provides the fundamental bases for the law-making (legislative) power of the modern state; in return it is the independent judiciary branch of the modern government in performing the law application and jurisdiction function of the modern state, that provides that legal protection of all citizen in exercising their communicative power. (Habermas, 1996, P ) Habermass Conceptual Framework of Power 90 yPopular sovereignty and communicative power: .. xThe principle of the legality of administration: The principle requires that the administrative power of the modern state has to be subject to law and judicial review (as well as to parliamentary oversight). (Habermas, 1996, P. 169) This principle is once again relied on the communicative power of the public. In Habermas own words, in the system of public administration, there is concentrated power that must be always regenerated itself anew out of communicative power. Thus the law is not only constitutive for the power code that a steers administrative process. It represents at the same time the medium for transforming communicative power into administrative power. The idea of the constitutional state can therefore be expounded with the aid of principles according to which legitimate law is generated from communicative power and the latter in turn is converted into administrative power via legitimately enacted law. (Habermas, 1996, P. 169) Habermass Conceptual Framework of Power 91 yPopular sovereignty and communicative power: .. xThe principle of separation of the state and society: The principle is intended to prevent social power from being converted directly into administrative power, that is, without first passing through the sluices of communicative power formation. (1996, P. 170) These direct conversions of social power into administrative power could take the forms of the prestigious and/or preferential treatments provided by the public officials and administrators to the prestigious classes in other social spheres, such as the business sector. Habermass Conceptual Framework of Power 92 93 Social Power in the Lifeworld Uncoupling of the Lifeworld Constitution of the State & Political Power Constitution of the Market & Economic Power Constitution of the Public Sphere & Communicative Power Legislative Power of the Parliament Administrative Power of the Executive Branch Judiciary Power of the Court Communicative power of the electorate as legitimate bases for legislative power Communicative power as monitor against arbitrary and abusive use of administrative power Independent Jurisdiction provides Legal Protection for the Communicative Power of Individual Citizens Judicial Review act as mediator between Administrative Power of the State & the Communicative power of citizens Communicative power as sluice guides against the direct conversion of economic power into administrative power yTo recapitulate the approaches to the concept of power Locating the Power Foundation for the Practices of Educational Management & Educational Governance 94 Power as ability to dominate and to suppress others will Power as potentials to attain ones will and to excel As will prevails over Bs (Weber) As inner potentials and capability to attain the thing he has reason to value (A. Sens concept of capability) A and B communicate and then consent to jointly attain their common will and/or common good (Arendt & Habermas) A makes B to do or not to do according to As will (Dahl) As ability to assert his intended influence on B (Wong) As ability to prevent Bs to voice his grievance (Bachrach & Baratz) As ability to encroach on Bs interest (Luke) - Direct encroachment - Preventing B to assert claim on his interest - deluding B from conscious of his interest A subjugating B (Foucault) - Subjecting the physical body (Disciplinary power) - Subjecting the biological state of the body (Biopower) - Subjecting the mind and soul (Pastoral power) 96 Hierarchy Market Network Community Network Professional Network Intergovernmental Network Producer Network Issue Network Metagovernance Interactive Governance Polycentric Governance New Public Service 1 st Order Capacities of delivering mean-end rational effectiveness & efficiency Power as ability to dominate and to suppress others will Power as potentials to attain ones will and to excel As will prevails over Bs (Weber) As inner potentials and capability to attain the thing he has reason to value (A. Sens concept of capability) A and B communicate and then consent to jointly attain their common will and/or common good (Arendt & Habermas) A makes B to do or not to do according to As will (Dahl) As ability to assert his intended influence on B (Wong) As ability to prevent Bs to voice his grievance (Bachrach & Baratz) As ability to encroach on Bs interest (Luke) - Direct encroachment - Preventing B to assert claim on his interest - deluding B from conscious of his interest A subjugating B (Foucault) - Subjecting the physical body (Disciplinary power) - Subjecting the biological state of the body (Biopower) - Subjecting the mind and soul (Pastoral power) zDefining who is A and Who is B in the educational contexts yGovernment officials and teaching professionals ySchool heads and schoolteachers yTeachers and fellow teachers yTeachers and students yTeachers and parents Locating the Power Foundation for the Practices of Educational Management & Educational Governance 97 zWhich conceptions of power to be used? yWhich specific conception of power? yWhich configuration of conceptions? Locating the Power Foundation for the Practices of Educational Management & Educational Governance 98 END