Compare And Contrast The Three Sources Of Authority Aideed Jr. And Pope Francis

What makes a political authority legitimate? A legitimate political authority, in this essay, will be taken to mean that there is a justification for an individual or a body to have power over other people in determining such things as laws and protection of freedom. To consider this question, three theories shall be looked at – Hobbes’, Rousseau and finally Locke and determine which gives the most persuasive account of legitimate political authority. To begin with, their hypothetical starting point, the state of nature, shall be discussed to establish the foundations of their political authority. Secondly, the reasons that shall lead man to get out of the state of nature will be examined in order to see if these logically follow on from

The purpose of this essay is to analyse Weber’s theory of authority and power in order to establish its role in the modern contemporary world today. Weber, in his most acclaimed writings, discusses his three ideal types of authority being outlined as traditional, charismatic and rational-legal authority. He believes that in order for any political leader or political establishment to hold legitimate authority over its peoples, they must have either one of these types of authority. All of these types of power and authority can be referred to in some way in today’s contemporary world using examples of differing political leaders and systems. However, Weber’s writings were conducted in 1922 and may be considered as out-dated, and not as relevant as they were at his time of writing. Also, many dispute that Weber’s types of authority were perhaps not entirely relatable and Martin Spencer, like many other critics of Weber’s work in fact argue that there should have been four types of authority. Hence why these issues must be discussed in order to conclude whether Weber’s ideal types of authority are representative of political leaders and governments, and whether or not they can be associated with the contemporary world we live in today.

Karol Józef Wojtyła, famously known as Pope John Paul II, was the Bishop of Rome and the pope of the Roman Catholic Church from October 1978 until his death on April 2005. As a pope, John Paul II was the first non-Italian pope in more than four centuries and the first Polish pope of the Roman Catholic Church. His papacy lasted for 27 years, which is to this day the second longest in history (Blakemore, 2017). He was also one of the most polarizing figures during the late twentieth century. Meanwhile, Pope John Paul II was more than just a pope because he had a different style of papal leadership, diplomacy, and a high charisma unlike his previous predecessors such as Pope Pius XII and Pope Paul VI (Scott, summer of 2000). Pope John Paul II transformed his influence as a pope to a worldwide office and used it to preach more than a billion of people across the globe. According to Scheller, Schaffer, Kurlantzick, Kulman, and Stille (2005), the pope was “a trained actor and philosopher who understood the power of word and symbol and wielded both with precision, whether in meetings with heads of state or before teeming crowds of the faithful (first paragraph).” John Paul II also believed that the church can have a much bigger impact by having world communications from different countries and he delivered the gospel by travelling around different parts of the world. The late pope was also well-known for inventing the World Youth Day, which is bringing about real transformation

On March 13, 2013 white smoke ushered in a new era within the Roman Catholic Church. For the first time in its history, a Pope from the Americas was chosen to lead. It was expected that the newly elected American Pope, who called himself Francis after St. Francis of Assisi, would help restore the Catholic Church’s reputation, reform the clerical bureaucracy, and reinvigorate Catholic participation. In the first few months of his papacy, that is exactly what he did.

In Weber’s article he claims that there are specific types of domination, which stress the importance of establishing “legitimacy” as a leader, within a group of people. He supports this opening claim in his introduction paragraph, in which he defines the authority of domination “classified” by the “kind of claim” demanded (2). He ultimately supports his by breaking down the types of legitimacy in domination in three distinct categories: Legal authority, traditional authority, and charismatic authority (3). He supports his argument through theoretical examples in which he assumes the reader has a background in. The assumptions include: knowledge of basic authoritative environments such as work setting or school that are applied to his

He made us aware on how so many individuals knowingly participated in the atrocious acts of violence against humanity and without much hesitance. He provided us the formula and a clear explanation on Max Weber views and how it was all possible for the bureaucratic domination of Germany, and the consequences of such power. Max Weber “was convinced that political domination would rest with whoever controlled the bureaucratic apparatus because of its indisputable superiority as an instrument for the organization of human action”. (Rubenstein, 23) Nazi Germany mastered the use of power and the management principles, this can be observed in Hitler’s organization of the concentration camps. Hitler replaced the existence camps with a more impersonal, systematized terror” camps. (Rubenstein, 24) Hitler and Nazi Germany established order in the camps, by applying bureaucracy principles. They established specialization, providing a meaning of set task and responsibilities each office and individual will handle and follow, making their job simpler and more efficient in following directions. They appointed individuals to ensure the written rules and regulations installed were being followed. This assured that individuals knew their responsibilities and made it easier for their assigned task to be completed. This also created recordkeeping of the rules, procedures and disciplinary actions.

The struggles against authority, repeatedly and continuously, take place in the history. As for those fighters, Voltaire, a famous French writer and thinker, once put forward an idea, “It is dangerous to be right in matters about which the established authorities are wrong.”() The word “right” contrasting to “wrong” means the truth. An “established authorities” could be regarded to the dominant powers controlling and guiding people, such as long-existing conventions held and propagated by the power-holders or the influential experts in specific fields. The article will support the idea of Voltaire by providing sufficient and concrete evidences. It is reasonable that people might suffer the possibility of oppression from the authority, when the ideas of the former contrasts to the latter who tend to retain its status. The challenger is dangerous in the way that the power of authorities, at most time, overwhelm them; the characteristic of opposing ideas invites the oppression by authority. It is possible to receive potential danger from the authority, while some did succeed in the struggle.

Pope John Paul the Second It was recently this year that the Catholic world had lost its leader,

Weber's discussion of authority relations also provides insight into what is happening in the modern world. Weber distinguished three main types of authority: Traditional authority, Rational-legal authority and Charismatic authority.

For weber power is determined as something that when imposed, then a person has to follow it. For Weber domination is the probability that persons will obey commands. Weber mentioned power as being ‘ sociologically amorphous’. (Roth and Wittich, 1968) The probability of a command being accepted mainly relates to the surroundings of domination. An example of this is that, a supervisor could expect his colleague to obey his sayings but when they meet outside the business then the supervisor is unlikely to have such an expectation (Watson, 2003).

Through analyzing the written works of Max Weber’s Types of Legitimate Domination and Bureaucracy to C. Wright Mills’ The Sociological Imagination, the writings of the comparative authors reveal the domination of power in a socially constructed society and the way that individuals are influenced by the constructed hierarchy of power. Through sociological analysis, these concepts can be applied to the ways individuals are continuously influenced through socially constructed institutions in a society where individuals constantly interact with one another. As Mills and Weber apply sociological analysis to the context of their observations, they are able to observe the growing positive and negative influences that ultimately shape the

The concept of power has been a topic of interest of many sociologists as they seek to define the term. Ensuring that the exercise of power is legitimate is a key integral to the concept of power in present day. However, although the power is seen as legitimate, it also has to be exercised appropriately as; ‘power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely’ (Dalberg-Acton, 1907: 504). Max Weber and Hannah Arendt are two sociologists whose ideology of what the concept of power is, are at the opposite ends of a pole. It is different in the fact that both theories approach different aspects of power. Weber’s account of power is more associated with everyday understanding and use of power, whereas Arendt’s account of power focuses more on power as a tool when speaking and acting in concert (Goverde H. & Lentner H, 2000).

The exercise of authority and power are facts as old as time, throughout the ages men have tried to explain and understand how and why political authority is organised. Sovereignty is a concept used to explain political power, to

Rational legal authority is the authority is the authority leaders attain on the basis of various rules which have been legally established. This type of authority can be identified in the modern society. Obedience is not given to any leader or tradition, but to legally passed laws. Examples of this form of authority can be found in the modern state as well, city governments, private and public corporations, Indian judiciary,

     Weber identifies several different types of authority. One is traditional legitimacy, which states that authority is bestowed upon someone based on traditional roles of authority, such as the pope or even the parents of children. Charismatic authority tells us that some are granted legitimacy to have authority over our lives by sheer charisma, such as Martin Luther King jr., Adolf Hitler and Gandhi. The third type of authority is rational-legal authority. This states that we grant legitimacy based upon the office they serve. An example of this is the inherent authority of Jesse Ventura over the people of Minnesota, simply because he holds the title of governor.