Authority is commonly understood as thelegitimate power of a person or group of other people.[1][2]In a civilstate,authority may be practiced bylegislative,executive, andjudicial branches ofgovernment,[3] each of which has authority andis an authority.[4]The term "authority" has multiple nuances and distinctions within various academic fields ranging fromsociology topolitical science.
The termauthority identifies thepolitical legitimacy, which grants and justifies rulers' right to exercise the power of government; and the termpower identifies the ability to accomplish an authorized goal, either by compliance or byobedience; hence,authority is thepower to make decisions and the legitimacy to make such legal decisions and order their execution.[5]
Ancient understandings of authority trace back toRome and draw later from Catholic (Thomistic) thought and othertraditional understandings. In more modern terms, forms of authority include transitional authority (exhibited in, for example,Cambodia),[6] public authority in the form of popular power, and, in more administrative terms, bureaucratic or managerial techniques. In terms of bureaucratic governance, one limitation of the governmental agents of the executive branch, as outlined by George A. Krause, is that they are not as close to the popular will aselected representatives are.[7] The claims of authority can extend to national or individualsovereignty, which is broadly or provisionally understood as a claim to political authority that islegitimated.[8]
Historical applications of authority in political terms include the formation of the city-state ofGeneva, and experimental treatises involving the topic of authority in relation to education includeEmile, or On Education byJean-Jacques Rousseau. AsDavid Laitin defines, authority is a key concept to be defined in determining the range and role of political theory, science and inquiry.[9]
There have been several contributions to the debate ofpolitical authority. Among others,Hannah Arendt,Carl Joachim Friedrich,Thomas Hobbes,Alexandre Kojève andCarl Schmitt have provided some of the most influential texts.
In Europeanpolitical philosophy, thejurisdiction of political authority, the location ofsovereignty, the balancing of notions offreedom and authority,[10] and the requirements of political obligations have been core questions from the time ofPlato andAristotle to the present. Mostdemocratic societies are engaged in an ongoing discussion regarding the legitimate extent of the exercise ofgovernmental authority. In theUnited States, for instance, there is a prevailing belief that the political system as instituted by theFounding Fathers should accord the populace as much freedom as reasonable; that government should limit its authority accordingly, known aslimited government.
Political anarchism is a philosophy which rejects the legitimacy of political authority and adherence to any form of sovereign rule or autonomy of a nation-state.[3] An argument for political anarchy is made byMichael Huemer in his bookThe Problem of Political Authority. On the other side, one of the main arguments for the legitimacy of the state is some form of thesocial contract theory developed by Thomas Hobbes in his 1668 book,Leviathan, or by Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his political writings onthe social contract.
Insociology,authority is thelegitimate or socially approved power which one person or a group possesses and practices over another. The element of legitimacy is vital to the notion of authority and is the main means by which authority is distinguished from the more general concept ofpower.
Power can be exerted by the use of force orviolence. Authority, by contrast, depends on the acceptance bysubordinates of the right of those above them to give them orders ordirectives.[11][12][13]
The definition of authority in contemporary social science remains a matter of debate.Max Weber in his essay "Politics as a Vocation" (1919) divided legitimate authority intothree types. Others, likeHoward Bloom, suggest a parallel between authority andrespect/reverence for ancestors.[14]
Max Weber defined domination (authority) as the chance of commands being obeyed by a specifiable group of people. Legitimate authority is that which is recognized as legitimate and justified by both the ruler and the ruled. Legitimated rule results in what Weber called the monopoly over the use of coercive violence in a given territory.[15]
The concept of authority has also been discussed as a guiding principle in human-machine interaction design.[16]
Genetic research indicates that obedience to authority may be a heritable factor.[17]
Authority and its attributes have been identified as of particular relevance to children as they regard their parents and teachers. The three attributes of authority have been described asstatus,specialist skills orknowledge, andsocial position. Children consider the type of command, the characteristics of the authority figure, and the social context when making authority conclusions.[18]
Although children regard these three types of authority attributes, they first assess the legitimacy of the authority figure in question using the nature of the commands they give. For example, a teacher who does not appear to have legitimate power from the child's perspective (perhaps because she or he cannot control the class well) will not be obeyed. Regarding parenting, authoritative parents who are warm and high in behavioral control but low in psychological control are more likely to be seen as having legitimate authority over the child, and will believe themselves that they have a duty to obey them and internalize their values. While the study of children in modern capitalist societies does look at the psychological aspects of children's understanding of legitimate authority at the level of symbolic interaction it is also true that is an extrapolated assumption based on one interpretation of a broad Comparative Historical Sociological (CHS) analysis of legitimate authority in multiple societies over a long duration, not the micro-social psychological study of children per se. There is nothing in Weber's published work in the Max Weber Gesamtausgabe that directly deals with children's perceptions in "formations" with traditional legitimate authority, prior to the emergence of modern capitalism .[19]
Hofstede Insights details "Power Distance" as: "Power distance is defined as the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organisations within a country expect and accept that power is distributed unequally", which can be interpreted as respect for authority. Generally, ex-communist countries, poor countries, and non-Protestant countries have the highest power distance (respect for inequality in the distribution of power). According toHofstede Insights 2021 country comparison, all countries with power distance below 50 are Western Protestant democracies, except for Austria.[20]
The foundation of American legitimate authority rests on theconsent of the governed. This understanding of political authority and the exercise ofpolitical powers in the American context traces back to the writings of theFounding Fathers, including the arguments put forward inThe Federalist Papers byJames Madison,Alexander Hamilton and the first chief justice of the United StatesJohn Jay, and was referenced in the unanimousUnited States Declaration of Independence:[21]
We hold these truths to be self-evident, thatall men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these areLife, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from theconsent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Later, speeches by the 16thpresident of the United StatesAbraham Lincoln would reiterate this fundamental source of legitimacy. "Our government rests in public opinion," Lincoln said in 1856.[22]: 21 In his 1854 speech atPeoria, Illinois, Lincoln espoused the proposition “that each man should do precisely as he pleases with all which is exclusively his own," a principle existing "at the foundation of the sense of justice."[22]: 47 This sense of personal ownership and stewardship was integral to the practice of self-government as Lincoln saw it by aRepublican nation and its people. This was because, as Lincoln also declared, "No man is good enough to govern another man, without that other's consent."[22]: 48
The U.S. president is called to give account to the legislature for the conduct of the whole government, including that of regulatory agencies. The president influences the appointments, and the budgeting process and has the right and capacity to review regulatory rules on a case-by-case basis. Since the time of theReagan administration the president was informed with acost–benefit analysis of the regulation.[23] The creation of aregulatory agency requires anAct of Congress which specifies its jurisdiction, the related authority and delegated powers. Regulatory authorities can be qualified as independent agencies or executive branch agencies, a choice which is the reason of struggle between congress and the president as well as with the American courts. The latter's role is limited by the authorities' power to regulateproperty rights without thedue process rights mandatorily applied by the courts.[23]
Political authority has two sides to it. On the one side, people generally recognize itas authority, in other words as having the right to command ... On the other side, people who refuse to obey are compelled to do so by the threat of sanctions ... And these two aspects are complementary.
[According to Kant, the] juridicial order of civil society found its concrete institutional embodiment in the civil state, as through the legislative, executive and judicial authorities that comprised the basis of the state constitution and the system of state government. Of the three state authorities, the legislative authority was understood by Kant to be foundational in that it stood as the sovereign authority in the state ...
To validate an argument, we refer back to our ancestors – or to someone who, while still alive, has already garnered the sort of authority only ancestors normally have.
Media from Commons
Quotations from Wikiquote
Data from Wikidata
