Sociological Imagination is a concept created by C. Wright Mills that he saw as a way that enables its possessor to understand the larger historical scene in one’s life in terms of its meaning of inner as well as external career to a variety of individuals (Garrod, 2016). It is a person’s ability to go beyond the personal issues everyone can experience and connects them to a broader social structure (Naimen, 7). Power is the ability of an individual and/or group of people to be able to carry out their/its will, even when opposed against by others, and is usually in the hands of those who control most of society 's resources (Naimen, 6). The reason why sociologists are interested in studying power and believe it to be an important area of …show more content…
The topics and concepts of proximal relations of power, distal relations of power and the historical aspects of colonialism will help demonstrate the reasons for studying the effects of power as well as showing how sociological imagination ties into the topic. The purpose of studying power is to help us better understand who and what has the control in the societies that we live in. By applying the concept of sociological imagination, people are given the ability to connect their own personal issues to the issues that society as a whole have to deal with. To better understand the power dynamic is a key reason why sociologists study the concept of power. In society, it can be agreed that there are two main types of power, proximal relations of power and distal relations of power. Proximal relations of power deals within the personal relationships in society, whereas distal relations of power are related to society in a more abstract way that affects it as a …show more content…
They were able to connect their suffering, their personal problems to a greater level. They could link the distal relations of power to their own immediate situations (Naimen, 7). By studying power and the control it can have over people, and by looking into the past, we can see how that type of control can lead to terrible outcomes for both small groups and society as a whole. We have come to know that every individual life, from one generation to the next, in society has lived it out within some historical sequence merely by the fact that people live, they contribute, no matter how minutely, to the shaping of their society and to the course of its history (Mills, N/A). So by making sure power is used in a way that does not interfere with this idea we can see when critical issues, which span throughout time, do not have to continue. They can in fact be stopped before having and wide ranging detrimental effects if we learn to understand how to use power through studying it over time. In conclusion, the concept of power is something that has been around for as long as there have been people. And it will continue to be a part of society for as long as people
In analyzing the institution of power so closely, the author has brought to light a multiple
Power simply can be defined as control over resources. This control allows for individuals to bring about change. The influence of power typically has a negative impact on individuals. It has even been said that “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Typically, as an individual gains power they tend to be less inhibited and act more based on their personal desires disregarding what is ethically right. Oftentimes, individuals lose sight of their morals in attempts to gain more power and exploit other people. Indeed, it is true that “with great power comes great responsibility” and whether an individual lets that responsibility corrupt them is a strong measure of their personal character (Ferguson and Peterson,
Within a society power serves a vital role of establishing and maintaining roles of dominance and submission (Bourdieu, 1977). This creates and maintains a social hierarchy of inequality that unconsciously determines the status, behavioural expectations and available resources for members of the community (Navarro, 2006). The meaning of power within a society is that it determines one’s social standing or relational position within the given community as well as the level of dominance or power they have available to exert onto others. Power, within a society is primarily created through the habitus, capital and culture of a
The sociological textbook definition of the sociological imagination is “the ability to grasp the relationship between individual lives and the larger social forces that help to shape them.” However like most things, the sociological imagination is a bigger and more important concept than its definition. The sociological imagination allows one to have both a third-person and first-person view of the world. Being able to look through someone’s eyes while simultaneously knowing the forces that shape what they see and do, gives one a much greater understanding of someone’s life. That’s what the sociological imagination allows us to do, gain a better understanding. Whether through economic, religious, racial, or other social forces, the sociological
Power is the physical and mental control someone or something has over another person or a group of people. I am afraid that if I plagiarize on my essay, I might be penalized or suspended. That is the power of fear. Power has the ability to impact the behavior of people. Contrary to what people believe, power does not necessarily involve the use of force, or threats. As important as analyzing power is, there is no way to really comprehend power. Power is too diverse and controversial. Power in our society is very unstable, causing gender inequality, racism and numerous other social problems. Let us take for example, gender inequality. We cannot explain gender inequality if we do not understand power first. Power does not result in gender inequality or racism, it builds them. Thinking about or fixing power imbalances will solve a lot of problems in the social world, and for that sole reason, it is worth thinking about power to understand society.
In his book, Power and Choice, W. Phillips Shively introduces to students of political science the importance of power within the framework of politics. According to him, “Politics consists of the making of a common decision for a group of people through the use of power”(Shively 9). And that “power” is, “the ability of one person or group to cause another person or group to do what the first wishes, by whatever means”(5). Power, therefore, is of extreme importance within the arena of politics for any group who wishes to institute reform or maintain order. And yet, the question of analyzing power, and understanding how it is used, is not as clear as one might imagine. There is a split among political scientists as to who has the power, and how those in positions of power keep it. The debate seems to be centralized over the difference between observable power (manifest) and indirect power (implicit). When deciding the question of who has the power, it seems that the arguments of Hunter and Dahl are mainly concerned with the observable power exercised by those in positions of authority. The other, and more sound, theory of Baratz, Bachrach, and Lukes, maintains that actual power lies within the manipulation of issues from behind the scenes. In answering the question of power, the arguments of Baratz, Bachrach, and Lukes, go beyond the those of Hunter and Dahl, and show that the most effective uses of power are those which are the hardest to see, (implicit power).
Power has been defined as the psychological relations over another to get them to do what you want them to do. We are exposed to forms of power from the time of birth. Our parents exercise power over us to behave in a way they deem appropriate. In school, teachers use their power to help us learn. When we enter the work world the power of our boss motivates us to perform and desire to move up the corporate ladder so that we too can intimidate someone with power one day. In Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness Kurtz had a power over the jungle and its people that was inexplicable.
Some theorists believe that ‘power is everywhere: not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere… power is not an institution, nor a structure, nor possession. It is the name we give to a complex strategic situation in a particular society. (Foucault, 1990: 93) This is because power is present in each individual and in every relationship. It is defined as the ability of a group to get another group to take some form of desired action, usually by consensual power and sometimes by force. (Holmes, Hughes &Julian, 2007) There have been a number of differing views on ‘power over’ the many years in which it has been studied. Theorist such as Anthony Gidden in his works on structuration theory attempts to integrate basic structural analyses and agency-centred traditions. According to this, people are free to act, but they must also use and replicate fundamental structures of power by and through their own actions. Power is wielded and maintained by how one ‘makes a difference’ and based on their decisions and actions, if one fails to exercise power, that is to ‘make a difference’ then power is lost. (Giddens: 1984: 14) However, more recent theorists have revisited older conceptions including the power one has over another and within the decision-making processes, and power, as the ability to set specific, wanted agendas. To put it simply, power is the ability to get others to do something they wouldn’t otherwise do. In the political arena, therefore, power is the ability to make or influence decisions that other people are bound by.
A world of system designed to keep people in unjust and unequal positions is held in place by several interrelated expression of "power over": political power, economic power, physical force, and ideological power (Bishop, 1994: 36). So, we can say power is defined as a possession of control, authority or influence over others. In terms of power of dominant groups over subordinate groups, we define power as domination of one group of people over another in major important spheres of life. Power inequities have been in existence throughout the history of humanity and the ways of manifestation evolved from extreme overt oppression to subtle, covert oppression. Three major forms of power inequalities discussed in this paper are based on property (class), domination whites over others (race) and men over women (gender).
is annexed from its conventionally assumed meaning, which pertains to the top down power model whereby, one or a very small set of individuals set out to seize power and exercise it as a singular force over the masses from a position of exteriority. However in the context of cultural studies power is re-contextualised through a number of postmodern discourses which seek to resist the dominant discourses, which claim that power is in fact mediated from above (Enthler N, 2013, week 3). Power from a postmodernist standpoint is exercised from innumerable points within society and acts more like a network which heralds multifaceted interdependencies between individuals, than a structure which exerts power over the powerless (Focault M, 1989).
French, J. R. P., Jr., & Raven, B. H. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150–167). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
A)Summary: The sociological imagination can be applied directly to our individual lives. It consider about what specific things do we actual need. we should be able to recognize the practical and immediate value of sociology to solving the problems we met. It refers to the ability to connect biography with history. sociological imagination is to help develop the ability to participate in social life and step back and analyze broader meanings of what is going on in the world around us. It suggests that people look at their own personal problems as social issues and, in general, try to connect their own individual experiences with the workings of society. So we all have a sociological imagination. It just requires development.
Attempts to define power have been traditionalistic, contentious and mundane despite the concept’s widespread use. Two salient features were presented for the controversial assumptions in defining power: power as domination and power as empowerment. In seeking to comprehensively reconcile the “contestedness” about power, Steven Lukes (2005) observes that how we conceive of power makes a difference to how we think and act in general especially in social contexts. The views of power can be a personal process where the interviews and the focus group served as helping the participants grapple with the controversy and discomfort surrounding the concept.
The concept of a sociological imagination may seem simple, but it actually proves to be fairly complicated to carry out. The vast majority of people are unfamiliar with the idea of having a sociological imagination and therefore have many questions about it. When is it used? What purpose does it serve? How will it benefit me? The term sociological imagination was first introduced by C. Wright Mills, an American sociologist (McIntyre 2014). According to Mills, a person who has a sociological imagination has “the ability to look beyond the personal troubles of individuals to see the public issues of social structure" (McIntyre 2014:31). Mills wanted people to open their minds in order to see what forces from society were acting upon a person.
Mills thought that the imbalanced distribution of power was the cause of many public issues. For example, many people do not have enough power to access political institutions and this entrapment may make them feel indifferent, therefore, they become politically apathetic and politically powerless. Through the “sociological imagination”, people can trace the distribution of power as an evolutionary and historical process which can be used as an explanation for their personal troubles.