----- Original Message ----- From: "Catherine Driscoll" <catherine.driscoll at adelaide.edu.au> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Sent: Sunday, December 08, 2002 4:03 PM Subject: Re: power
> >
> > And you are conflating power-to with power-over and not recognizing
the
> > distinction of
> > using power as a term to define and power as a term of explanation.
> >
> > Ian
>
> Definitions shape explanations and the other way around. The
distinction is
> spurious at best.
=========================
Nice to see that adolescent incredulity still exists among some members of the academic class.
>
> If power-to and power-over are so dissimilar, how come they're both
> specifically/definitively modes of "power-"?
>
> Catherine
======================
Uh, because the inherited genealogy of discourse regarding the predication of power "weighs upon" contemporary grammar? You're the academic philosopher, why don't you de-obfuscate the fuzziness of the distinctions we've gotten from Machiavelli, Weber, Green, Dahl, Lukes etc...........?
Ian