Paradoxs Of Power Essay, Research Paper

It may be said that the establishment of power has ever been a prevailing force in our

society. It is a big portion of what holds society together ; without it civilized society as we know it

would non be. The maps of power scope from maintaining offense at bay to the more

platitude facets such as leting frequenters to be served in a eating house. The impression of power

is about unseeable until farther analyzed ; it is something that we perceive as being simple

and hence take for granted. Yet there are so many elaboratenesss in respect to power that still

remain to be seen. In Chapter Three of Sociological Insight by Randall Collins, the writer

establishes some valid points refering power. He posits that power is something of a self-

contradiction, that it is frequently most effectual when subtly exercised. Collins besides delves into the

assorted signifiers that power may take, such as money and coercion, which are negated as valid signifiers

of power. Last, the importance of inexplicit rules and apprehensions is emphasized, besides

exemplifying that power is most steadfastly established in the kingdom of both certainty and uncertainness.

In conformity with the rubric of Chapter Three, Paradoxes of Power, Collins & # 8217 ; chief point is

that power is genuinely a contradiction ; the word itself evokes images of sovereign and times long

gone by. But in the present twenty-four hours and an epoch marked by the rise of democracy, power has little to

make with such establishments ; instead it something that is exercised on high degrees every bit good as lower 1s.

Although it is something non frequently thought approximately, power is everyplace. It is apparent in the legal

system & # 8217 ; s prosecution of felons and a kid & # 8217 ; s conformity with a female parent & # 8217 ; s petition ; it is wholly

possible that power exists in some signifier within every human and societal relationship. Yet some

signifiers of power are surely more effectual than others. The key to recognizing power most

efficaciously lies in the recognition of occasional grant and cognizing when to & # 8220 ; giv ( vitamin E ) in

on something less of import & # 8221 ; ( 74 ) . For case, one time once more see the illustration of a female parent

and kid. Assume that the kid wants to travel over to a friend & # 8217 ; s house to play, but he has promised

his female parent that he would make his jobs that afternoon. The kid begs his female parent to allow him travel

and drama, guaranting her that he will make his jobs instantly upon geting place. The female parent

concedes, and the kid is happy. If we are to analyse this state of affairs in footings of additions and losingss,

the female parent has gained points with her boy and has basically suffered no loss-the jobs will still

be done, merely a few hours subsequently. Throughout the full scenario, the female parent & # 8217 ; s power is apparent,

both expressed and implicitly ; the boy does non bury that his female parent has the ultimate say in what

he does, and in allowing her boy travel she has non merely made him happy but is besides asseverating her power

as a parent. In amount, the female parent has most efficaciously realized her power by cognizing when to

forfeit something that is of lesser importance while deriving more long-run benefits.

Another manner that power may be asserted is by the influences of certain state of affairss, viz.

that of certainty and uncertainness. The former has been expounded on in the old paragraph,

while the latter has yet to be explained. Possibly uncertainness may be thought of as a “foothold” for

power. Uncertainty assures power and laterality by using the fright of the unknown. An

illustration of this is the success of insurance companies, who basically sell peace of head. They

attain and set up their power by doing people to inquire, & # 8220 ; What if & # 8230 ; & # 8221 ; Since most people do non

hold the ability to see into the hereafter, an insurance policy seems like a reasonable thing to hold.

It would even be just to state that insurance companies have capitalized on the impression of

uncertainness.

Collins besides claims that the two most normally overestimated signifiers of power, money

and coercion, are instead invalid signifiers of control. Money is frequently thought of as the ultimate

inducement ; it can guarantee you that the occupation will be done, but it does non vouch how good that

occupation will be performed or that you will even be satisfied with the exchange. It is human nature to

derive the most benefits with the least sum of work possible, hence doing money an

inefficient control. For those who do non care whether the quality of work is hapless, so it may be

said that money is so an effectual method of exercising power. However, that is non frequently the

instance, and as a general regulation money is decidedly a hapless signifier of power.

Another extremely ineffectual signifier of power is that of coercion by force. Coercion essen-

tially utilizes menaces and terrorist act in order to carry through one & # 8217 ; s end ; it is possibly the most

contradictory of all the different signifiers of power. It is besides the most self-defeating ; the more it is

exercised the less control is attained over a subsidiary. Possibly the most interesting inquiry

that now may be raised is why one would desire to maltreat person who is executing a undertaking

for them. Logically, making so would merely damage the subsidiary and take down his or her capacity

for work, non to advert the interior rebellion that such intervention would convey approximately. Let the

premise be made that through repeated menaces and little physical injury, a grade of relation

control is established over a subsidiary. Although you now technically have control over

this person, they are inside arising against you and how you have treated them. They will

make whatever you ask them to, but the quality of their work will be highly hapless, non unlike the

consequences of utilizing money as a signifier of control. Therefore, both money and coercion are proven to be

inefficient signifiers of power.

In analysing the establishment of power so closely, the writer has brought to illume a multiple

of point of views on power in its many signifiers. Possibly he wishes to interrupt down the constituents of

power in order for it to be seen in a simpler visible radiation and to stress the classless nature of

humanity in malice of societal categorizations, by clarifying the fact that power is something that can

be learned.

What I have gathered from this analysis is chiefly the dichotomy of power. It is at times both

complex and startlingly basic, due to the fact that, with the exclusion of philosophers, it is non

something frequently meditated upon. I have come off from this reading with the cognition that

power is non based entirely upon ever holding the upper manus, but instead it is cognizing when to

concede.