Abstract
Brian Barry attacks the ‘resource account’ of power providing a set of definitions through which power should be analysed. While there might be different, equally good, ways of defining power, I argue that the formulations provided by Dowding are superior to those of Barry as they produce fewer anomalies and provide a better foundation for empirical research. The article defends the resource account against Barry's criticisms and argues for the utility of the ideas of luck and ‘systematic luck’.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 305-322 |
Number of pages | 18 |
Journal | Politics, Philosophy and Economics |
Volume | 2 |
Issue number | 3 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Oct 2003 |
Externally published | Yes |