Oi vey! Talk about a mishmosh! Three different definitions without significatory distinctions? Definitely Foucault mixed with Neitzsche!
Ridiculous. Those are merely indicators of potential actions (behaviours) and the socio-cultural acceptance of such indicators. If these were indicators of empirical power, then the US would not exist (the Brits had more guns and there was never a vote in the fullest sense in the thirteen colonies for succession).
If it was the case, then the Taliban would not be operational any more. And "balance of power" is an empty phrase unless you have a better definition of power.
Most theologies are phenomenological abstractions. The generalization might be "superior", then again it may not be. If you look at the history of science, one thing that is pretty clear is that rigid, deductive models that metastesize into theologies are always overthrown by inductive models (check out Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions).
Always good to see people spouting theological truisms, especially when they are taken from theologies that would disagree totally with what you have said so far - I doubt the Quakers would agree with your definitions of power .
All theoretical models are, loosely speaking, exercises in power. As yto your second statement, right back at ya .
[QUOTE=Taiko;78478This statement is a tautology based on a teleological approach arrived at via induction. You have identified the effect, now lets finish the proposition by identifying the cause, the struggle for power.[/QUOTE]More seriously, anyone who doesn't think that changes in technology will cause (in the inductive sense I described earlier) changes in behaviour needs to seriously rethink their position.
You know, I think you need a dictionary! Check out exactly what teleology means:
What, pray tell, do you see in my statement either implying a metaphysical "purpose" or "design", or a direction to a final result? You, on t'other hand along with many others in the Realist School of IR, automatically assume a telelogical position by asserting the "struggle for power" as both a cause and an end.Teleology (Greek: telos: end, purpose) is the philosophical study of design and purpose. A teleological school of thought is one that holds all things to be designed for or directed toward a final result, that there is an inherent purpose or final cause for all that exists.
Source
The danger with such a position is that you already know the cause - "now lets finish the proposition by identifying the cause, the struggle for power". That is a theological position.
Bookmarks