Advantage of Legal Authority – GNF Technologies

Advantage of Legal Authority

Posted by: GNF technologies Comments: 0

Authority refers to accepted power – that is, power that people agree to follow. People listen to authority figures because they feel that these people deserve respect. In general, people perceive the goals and demands of an authority figure as reasonable and beneficial or true. As the name suggests, traditional authority is a power rooted in a society`s traditional or long-standing beliefs and practices. It exists and is attributed to certain individuals according to the customs and traditions of that society. Individuals enjoy traditional authority for at least one of the following two reasons. The first is inheritance, since some individuals are granted traditional authority because they are the children or other relatives of people who already exercise traditional authority. The second reason why individuals enjoy traditional authority is more religious: their societies believe that they are anointed by God or the gods, depending on the religious beliefs of society to lead their society. Traditional authority is common in many pre-industrial societies where tradition and customs are so important, but also in more modern monarchies (briefly discussed), where a king, queen or prince enjoys power because he or she comes from a royal family. Charismatic authority comes from the extraordinary personal qualities of an individual and the influence of that individual on his followers based on those qualities. Such charismatic individuals can exercise authority over an entire society or only over a particular group within a larger society. You can exercise your authority for better or for worse, as this short list of charismatic leaders shows: Joan of Arc, Adolf Hitler, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., Jesus Christ, Muhammad, and Buddha.

Each of these individuals had extraordinary personal traits that led their followers to admire them and follow their orders or demands to act. The unique feature of modern legal-rational authority is that it becomes an impersonal process that is not carried out – there is a separation between those who implement the rules, and there is a separate procedure – right? -how the rules are defined. Is it reasonably clear what ownership of administrative funds means? As I mentioned earlier, this is a very Weberian idea. Right? For Marx – isn`t it? – it is the ownership of the means of production. For Weber, everything revolves around administrations, the means of administration. Not all authority figures are police officers, elected officials or government agencies. In addition to formal functions, authority can derive from tradition and personal qualities. Economist and sociologist Max Weber recognized this when he examined individual actions in relation to authority as well as large-scale authority structures and their relationship to a society`s economy. Based on this work, Weber developed a classification system for authorities. Its three types of authority are traditional authority, charismatic authority and legal-rational authority (Weber 1922).

You have just read what can happen when there is no effective authority. Life in the Old West, as Twain described, was sometimes violent and dangerous. Authority can be used to protect our rights to life, liberty and property. Because charismatic leaders realize that their ultimate death can undermine the nation or cause they represent, they often appoint a substitute leader who they hope will also have charismatic qualities. This new leader may be an adult child of the charismatic leader or someone else the leader knows and trusts. The danger, of course, is that each new leader lacks sufficient charisma for his authority to be accepted by the followers of the original charismatic leader. For this reason, Weber realized that charismatic authority eventually becomes more stable as it evolves into a traditional or rational-legal authority. Transformation into traditional authority can occur when the authority of charismatic leaders is accepted as being in their lineages, so that their authority passes to their children and then to their grandchildren. Transformation into rational and legal authority occurs when a society led by a charismatic leader develops the rules and bureaucratic structures that we associate with a government. Weber used the term routinization of charism to refer to the transformation of charismatic authority in one of these ways. Okay, let me start with what the pure type of legal-rational authority is.

And there are really two issues that we need to talk about very briefly. There are several ways to set laws and standards. We are already starting to look at whether the rule of law and democracy are the same or, you know, whether they can be democratic or whether they do not necessarily have to be. And then the question arises, who obeys what and who, under the legal authority? So, and a little bit about legal-rational authority. So the argument is – isn`t it? – that there are different ways of establishing laws or standards. And now, he said, legal authority is based on accepting the following ideas. Right? Well, standards, he said, can be set by agreement — that is what we usually think when we think of the rule of law — or by imposition; It can be imposed on people. Right? And this can be done for reasons of expediency.

This can happen because they are the most useful laws and we agree that this is what we want to obey or that there is an authority they impose on us. Or it can be based on the rationality of value. It may not be so timely, it may not necessarily be immediately useful, but on the basis of common values or the values of those who impose these laws – and we tend to believe it – we will – that is how it will be established. Well, and there are these different limits of bureaucratic authority. One is collegiality, separation of powers and representation. Well, I don`t want to dwell too long on the notion of collegiality. Collegiality, he says, really comes from what we knew as professional groups or professional organizations. There are many ways collegiality can work. A possibility – this means that you interact with other people in the same organization based on collegiality. You can get a good idea of this collegiality; For example, it is very important in the medical profession.

When you go to a doctor for a second opinion, that doctor really shouldn`t say that his colleague, the other doctor, really messed up and gave you the wrong diagnosis or therapy. Right? Collegiality means staying together – doesn`t it? – that the profession holds firm. There is a very strong sense of collegiality among lawyers, or at least it should be. The ethics of advocacy are a lot of collegiality. You may have people who are not competent to exercise authority over what they do. But I think it`s important that you have the ideal guy, because then you can be upset and say, “Those bloody bastards.” Right? “It`s incompetent; can`t do the job. And then you can appeal and say, “Why don`t you remove this person because that person doesn`t know what their job is?” And in fact, such an attraction is very often consistent. People are sometimes deprived of their position when their incompetence is demonstrated. Well, it`s very difficult in a university because universities, we have this system of permanence.

Do you know? After suffering as an assistant professor for seven years, you are promoted to employment, and then it is very difficult to get you to leave work. But it`s also possible at university. If you find out I`m completely incompetent, isn`t it? – You`re documenting that I`m incompetent – right? – that I am only misinterpreting all the authors you have had here. And then you can – right? – turn to university, and you can say that I really should be kidnapped; My mandate should be invoked. And if it turns out that I am incompetent, I will lose my job; But the only way to do this is through my incompetence. But in fact, universities do it very rarely because it`s a very painful exercise. But because they are bureaucracies, there are – aren`t they? – the rule that this can happen, and it should happen in these cases. Traditional authority is granted to individuals, regardless of their qualifications.