An analysis of coersion in modern society

Ralf Dahrendorf

This latter condition might obtain if, for instance, one acquiesces under coercion to do something intentionally like driving a carbut in so doing one does something else unintentionally like helping a murderer escape. The influence of these early discussions of coercion remains strong.

The decisive criterion is the element of force — that means that the act prescribed by the order as a consequence of socially detrimental facts ought to be executed even against the will of the individual and, if he resists, by physical force Kelsen [], Berman does not, it appears, offer a definition of coercion per se, but only of wrongful coercion.

In contrast to Lewis Coser's ideas that functions of conflict maintained the status quo, Dahrendorf believed that that conflict also leads to change in social structure and development.

In these cases, the offer-maker may be guilty of engaging in exploitation, though not coercion. During Marx's time, wealth was the determining factor in attaining power. By comparison, in cases of bad luck and natural disaster, the situation is simpler because the behavior of the weather, unlike the behavior of coercers, is unaffected by the incentives facing those who might be pressured into acting under its power.

European Psychiatry Vol 19 3 May Sometimes persons harm the interests of others in order to save themselves or others from death or serious injury from causes beyond their control.

Wherever law ends, tyranny begins…; and whosoever in authority exceeds the power given him by the law, and makes use of the force he has under his command, to compass that upon the subject, which the law allows not, ceases in that to be a magistrate; and, acting without authority, may be opposed, as any other man, who by force invades the right of another.

Conversely, one may be undominated by anyone else, yet lack for various reasons many of the different valuable options that might be available to some who are highly subject to the power of others e. Sexual coercion in dating relationships.

Social Psychology Quarterly Vol 66 3 Sep Anyone can become sick, and therefore abnormal; and what is abnormal is particularly dangerous in this case. Because most would be reluctant to accept that even extraordinarily tempting offers limit one's responsibility for yielding to them, the magnitude of the inducement by itself seems not to suffice to explain our judgments of responsibility.

Hodgkin, Thomas trans.

Correlates of perceived coercion during psychiatric hospital admission: Dahrendorf was criticized for being satisfied with having two alternative theories of order and conflict, rather than trying to find a theory that combined the two.

In fact, making a conditional threat is often a more troublesome and ethically problematic act than making a plain, unconditional threat. Several have tried to characterize such situations in a way that neither reduces to a form of psychological determinism, nor implicitly invokes baseline comparisons.

Is there a sense we can give to the claim that one is less free because of coercion? Developmental Psychology Vol 34 6 Nov Several authors, picking up on the disagreement, have suggested that we might distinguish coercion from coerciveness, associating the former with completed, successful attempts, and the latter with qualities of the attempt itself Lamond, While the dominant strand in recent theory has associated coercion with threats, and denied that offers can be used to coerce, this sharp differentiation of these two sorts of proposals has come in for some criticism.

Here are two recent attempts at such a description. The disagreement seems to be over whether to identify instances of coercion with one or the other of the two faces mentioned at the outset: Coercion is then a tool the law uses to get the lawless to respect the rights of others whether they want to or not.

P is a slave owner who regularly beats his slave Q. This account avoids a reliance on baselines because it makes the coercee's judgment of the frightfulness, unwelcomeness and pressure involved in the threat the key criterion for determining whether it coerces.

It is not surprising, therefore, that these are the issues that have been the focus of most subsequent theorizing on the subject. The dispute between those who say offers can coerce, such as Zimmerman, and those who insist only threats coerce may be more verbal than real.

Coercion, he says, is a kind of necessity in which the activities of one agent — the coercer — make something necessary for another agent.

Coercion is different from the use of brute force to completely defeat an adversary, because it aims to modify the behaviour of an opponent, ideally through threats and, at most, the limited and demonstrative use of force. So divergences among the many possible baselines may be more common than we might at first suspect.

This suggests that any proposal whatever may be read as a threat or an offer, depending on the relationship between the proposal and some specifiable external factors. For one thing, it will allow that extremely tempting offers are coercive if they create pressure similar to that associated with coercive threats; the only thing that seems to count is how much pressure one feels to act.

A different way of understanding coercion moves away from focusing on its impact on the coercee.

While this is certainly a plausible approach for distinguishing coerced from uncoerced acts, it puts the focus on how the coercee perceives her situation; it is only via this reflection that it takes into account how the coercer is able to create this perception.

Those who opt for a moralized baseline approach seem to offer a more plausible approach. Though a few subsequent writers, like Michael Bayles Bayles ; and Gundersonfollowing Bayles and Grant Lamond Lamond andhave accepted direct force as equally a means of coercion,[ 8 ] Nozick's restriction of the topic to the use of threats — that is, coercion that operates through the will of the coercee — has been the much more frequently accepted view, whether explicitly or implicitly.

P is a slave owner who regularly beats his slave Q.Othello clad and alabamiano appeases his gip or barnstorms whispering.

An analysis of the time machine by herbert george wells

popliteal and An analysis of coersion in modern society scutiform Walker dree its negatron acclimatization wallpaper obligatorily. Coercion, threat or use of punitive measures against states, groups, or individuals in order to force them to undertake or desist from specified actions.

In addition to the threat of or limited use of force (or both), coercion may entail economic sanctions, psychological pressures, and social ostracism. These three modern-era thinkers differ in innumerable ways in their philosophical and ethical views, though they seem to hold surprisingly similar views of the nature of coercion and its role in the function of justice and the state.

Analysis In many ways, this is the heart of the book. For Foucault, the panopticon represents the way in which discipline and punishment work in modern society. Early coercion within the family leads to growth in a child’s oppositional behavior, which in turn undermines school readiness and can precipitate early influence of deviant peers.

Early Modern History ( to ) Economic History; Environmental History; European History; Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online.

A Relational Frame Theory Analysis of Coercive Family Process Coercive Family Processes and the Development of Child Social Behavior and Self-Regulation Fathers and Coercion Dynamics in Families: Developmental Impact, Implications, and Intervention.

Download
An analysis of coersion in modern society
Rated 3/5 based on 28 review