The Definition of Independence People may say that the definition of independence is a complex word. In all truth independence is a difficult word to try to define. This is because everybody has their own assumption of what independence is. Very rarely are their two people that have the same perception of what the definition of independence is. What I believe that the definition of independence is the absolute freedom to do what you want, and to not be held back by any rules or laws of government or man, but by the rules and laws of nature and your own conscious.
The idea of power has many aspects to it and therefore is difficult to define. Some consider power to be authority while others may consider it to be control, yet no matter how many definitions society may come up with there is one undeniable fact. Power is intoxicating. The idea of being superior in anyway shape or form is seducing and almost impossible to turn down. Two admired philosophers, Michel Foucault and John Berger, have blessed the world with their different yet similar views on power and how it is obtained.
He has theoretical authority over you. Practical authority is to have legitimate power and be respected for it. It is the ability to lead, control and in essence take care of other people. Some philosophers such as Hobbes believe that if you are obeyed because you are feared, you do not have authority, only power. To have power you need not have authority but to have authority you must have
This paper will examine the nature of ‘soft power’ and its association with ‘hard power’, and it will show that neither soft nor hard power can be used on its own. While soft power might seem the better choice for states or political organisations to practise, it cannot be used without hard power to back it up. Soft power does not create a substitute to hard power, as a number of people appear to consider, being more precise Nye’s soft power evaluation balances that of hard power. Joseph Nye points out that every nation is able to exercise two forms of power, soft and hard power. Before we inspect the two divisions of power, we need to define power.
The strongest form of power is through force or coercion, whilst the weakest is through influential power. Although David Cameron may be referred to as a powerful person, he does not however have the authority to do as he wishes. An example of this would be that the prime minister cannot pass legislation just because he wants it. Power within politics can be lead by different leadership styles, either being a case of autocratic ruling or democratic leadership. What is authority?
The state assumes that it has power over individuals, which a view blights human freedom as was expressed by Proudhon ‘to be governed is to be inspected by creatures who neither have the right nor virtue to do so’. Liberals on the over hand do not view the state in such an pessimistic way, however believe that if the state was so have too much power it could indeed become oppressive and tyrannic thus threatening the sovereign individual: something that liberals heavily endorse. Therefore, liberals argue for a minimum ‘night watchman’ state (Nozick). This essay will argue that the state is not an oppressive body but instead a paternal figure, which serves to protect individuals more than it oppresses them. It can be argued from the anarchist perspective that the state is an oppressive body, which undermines human reason and the capacity for self governance.
Janika Hirvi Evaluate the role of reason as a way of knowing Sometimes I am surrounded by a lot of questionable things, whether there is someone controlling us, are we real, how do we know things? For these questions there are no right or wrong answers, but can we know, when our knowledge is heading into the right direction? In the world there are a lot of things were you can doubt, but still you have to make your own decisions what no one else can do for you, other people can just persuade you. We can assume many things, what are not explainable with reason, but it can lead us to a false conclusion. When conclusions are made, they are made usually through reasoning.
A firm structure is provided by there being an absolute theory,which does create less confusion when part-taking in decision making although the natural law does depended on a hierarchy, a greater power that is, a posteriori as no one is actually sure of its existence as there is not proof, only probability of the existence. A final criticism of why Natural law is not the best approach to Decision making is natural law removes the ability to make decisions freely, you are forced to think of whether you decision will be moral or approved of by the higherarchy, which does not appear to be the best way to chose how to deal with situations not matter how important the decision you make is. In conclusion, it is clear that natural moral law is not the best approach to Decision Making- a process through which the individual ‘seeks a solution’ to a problem or a
The actions of authoritarian state officials are overwhelmingly oriented toward the manipulation of regime procedures in order to preserve incumbent power. (Schedler.A,p.167) In this essay, I would to point out the main features of authoritarian regime and justice whether the post-handover Hong Kong is an authoritarian regime. The features of an authoritarian regime can be mainly divided into three parts including political, social and economic aspects: In political aspect, firstly, an authoritarian regime has limited political pluralism. Very often, the country is dominant by one party. The other parties are either banned or merely puppet.
This view claims that a person’s ideology or idea have the utmost claim to the truth and that it is ulterior ideology is coded “will to power”. This suggests that discourses for this view are more incommensurate due to the language games of power play being used. To explain simply, distinction between the image and reality have been blurred due to the struggle of power, thus making it hard for us to separate these two concepts. The Marxism view ideology as having relationship with power and domination. If you have more power, you will win the consent to exercise that power in dictating the dominant people’s views.