Some years ago, on request of the German Political Science Association (DVPW), an empirical investigation aOn the state and the orientation of political science in the Federal Republic of Germanya was conducted by Carl BAphret. Among other interesting 1 information, in the paper that was subsequently published the author presented the results of a survey among 254 political scientists in the Federal Republic on what they considered to be the sine qua non basic concepts of the discipline. In various respects, the data are remarkable. 2 On the one hand, the enormous diversity of the answers corroborates statistically what has long been known from experience, i. e. , the existence of an extremely wide variety of standpoints, perspectives, and approaches within the discipline. An interesting case in point is the concept of power. Somewhat surprisingly, apowera was not the most frequently mentioned term. But, it did, of course, end up at the very top of the list, in third place behind aconflicta and ainteresta. What is noteworthy is that it gained this position by being named only 81 times, that is, by less than a third of the respondents. This is no insignificant detail. Certainly, to that minority of scholars whose conceptions of politics do include apowera as an indispensable basic concept, the approaches of the vast majority of their colleagues for whom, as their answers in the survey reveal, apowera does not play an eminent role must appear, in an 3 important sense, mistaken or perhaps even incomprehensible.An agent may be responsible for someone elsea#39;s unfreedom without having ... and the concept of freedom in particular should now be sufficiently clear to enable us fully to understand his account of the relation between freedom and power.
|Title||:||Influence and Power|
|Publisher||:||Springer Science & Business Media - 2006-01-27|