Theorizing power: Weber, Parsons, Foucault and neostructuralism

The article is an attempt to develop a synthetic conception of power based on Weber's, Parsons's and Foucault's writings. The aim is, first, to build a bridge between the so-called resource theories of power (Weber, Parsons) and the structural approach (Foucault) and, second, to do this in the form of a conception which would be usable on both macro- and micro-levels at the same time. Four theories are discussed: (1) the distributive approach (Weber); (2) the collective approach (Parsons); (3) the structural approach (Foucault); and (4) the neostructuralist approach (this article). It is argued that these approaches can be ordered on a scale on which the complexity of analysis increases as one moves from (1) to (4), and that the selection of an appropriate level of analysis in an empirical study is a practical issue relative to the aim of the study. The types of analyses characteristic of the more complex levels are illustrated by a discussion of the problem posed by Big Case Comparison in historical sociology (level 3) and everyday conversation (level 4), including comments on phenomenological sociology and conversation analysis.