Editing Power (social and political) (section)

=== Other theories ===
* [[Thomas Hobbes]] (1588–1679) defined power as a man's "present means, to obtain some future apparent good" (''[[Leviathan (Hobbes book)|Leviathan]]'', Ch. 10).
* The ideas of [[David Hume]] (1711-1776) on the undesirable excesses with which [[monotheism | monotheistic]] intolerance can consolidate power have had wide resonance.<ref>
For example:
{{cite book
 |last1                = Lynch
 |first1               = Matthew
 |date                 = 25 March 2014
 |chapter              = 1.I Monotheism and Institutions: A Polarized Discussion: A Dangerous Alliance between Monotheism and Institutional Particularism?
 |title                = Monotheism and Institutions in the Book of Chronicles: Temple, Priesthood, and Kingship in Post-Exilic Perspective: Studies of the Sofja Kovalevskaja Research Group on Early Jewish Monotheism
 |url                  = https://books.google.com/books?id=zrxRcxEuSo0C
 |series               = Forschungen zum Alten Testament 2.Reihe, volume 64
 |volume               = 1
 |publication-place    = Tübingen
 |publisher            = Mohr Siebeck
 |pages                = 12–14
 |isbn                 = 9783161521119
 |access-date          = 13 January 2025
 |quote                = [...] the close association between divine and institutional supremacy carried with it an 'ideological temptation' to which Israel usually succumbed, and which led to brute assertions of power. This temptation, which [[Walter Brueggemann]] labels '[[mono-ideology]],' insisted on 'the singularity, peculiarity, and privilege of Israel as a political entity in the world,' and led Israel to 'imagine itself as privileged, in every sphere of life, as Yahweh's unrivaled and inalienable partner.' When monotheistic theology became wedded to notions of election, the partnership became most susceptible to misuse. Writers advancing monotheism aligned absolutely divine and institutional power. [...] The idea that monotheism engendered absolutism finds early expresssion in David Hume's ''[[The Natural History of Religion]]'' [...]. [...] Contemporary variations on Hume's thesis abound.
}}
</ref>
* The thought of [[Friedrich Nietzsche]] (1844–1900) underlies much 20th-century analysis of power. Nietzsche disseminated ideas on the "[[will to power]]", which he saw as the domination of other humans as much as the exercise of control over one's environment.
* Some schools of [[psychology]], notably those associated with [[Alfred Adler]] (1870–1937), place power dynamics at the core of their theory (where orthodox [[Freudian]]s might place [[human sexuality|sexuality]]).
* [[Paul Tillich]] (1886–1965) saw law as structuring/expressing power and developing through "sacramental" (community) and [[theocracy |theocratic]] stages before reaching a secular rational mode.<ref>
{{cite book
 |last1                = Thornhill
 |first1               = Chris
 |date                 = 31 October 2013
 |orig-date            = 2002
 |title                = Karl Jaspers: Politics and Metaphysics
 |url                  = https://books.google.com/books?id=JUbfAQAAQBAJ
 |series               = Routledge Studies in Twentieth-Century Philosophy
 |publication-place    = London
 |publisher            = Routledge
 |page                 = 162
 |isbn                 = 9781136454165
 |access-date          = 7 April 2024
}} 
</ref>
* Rodolfo Henrique Cerbaro suggests understanding power as "what counts as a means of determining a subject's position in a given competition".<ref>Cerbaro, Rodolfo Henrique. [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295166429_Competition-trapping_the_Concept_of_Power "Competition-trapping the Concept of Power"]. ''European Journal of Social Sciences'', v. 21, n. 1, pp. 148–153, 2011 - "Power seems to be best understood as what counts as a means of  determining a subject's position in a given competition, or, in other words, what we use to rank the competitors. This approach is widely applicable, because whenever we think of a competition, we use something to rank the competitors as either being superior or inferior in relation to each other  [...]."</ref>