Abstract
Lukes's three-dimensional view of power (1974) included a substantial normative element. This prompted some, including Hay (1997 and 2002 ) to argue that Lukes conflated analysis and critique, which resulted in unsatisfactory answers to some difficult questions about the exercise of power. This article examines Hay's critique and Lukes's defence of the normative component in his revised edition of Power: A Radical View(2005). It argues that attempts to formulate a purely empirical account of ‘real interests’ and separate the analysis of the third face of power from critique fail because positions on the structure and agency debate are at least partly informed by normative commitments and it shows how Lukes's 2005 reformulation can provide answers to two questions raised in his 1974 discussion.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
