Talk:Authority
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by the Sociology WikiProject, which gives a central approach to Sociology and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Authority, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Miscellany
A para or two on the psychological use of "authority" is needed, in particular, some discussion of or a link to the Milgram experiment. My psych training is even rustier than my sociology. I'll do it if no-one else wants to, but wherever possible I prefer to sit on the sidelines of psychology and merely criticise. Tannin
........
The dictionary entry is an illustration of the falsehood of any appeal to authority. Everybody knows Mao and Qaddaffi. What about the unknowns never demonized by the 'merican government? User:Two16
........
The link Power near the beginning of the article led to many irrelevant definitions of power, so I changed it to Power (sociology). I am disambiguationg the Power page. Gerry Ashton 14:45, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Estates General of 1789
I am rather dubious about the assertion that the Estates General of 1789 as such challenged the king's authority. The communes certainly challenged that authority when they withdrew from the Estates General (where they were outvoted by the other two estates), and they certainly did so when they declared the National Assembly, but that was precisely the demolition of the Estates General, not an action by the Estates General. This whole article could use a good going over. -- Jmabel 22:39, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- It's been six weeks, and no one has replied, so I'm going to edit freely in this respect. -- Jmabel 06:38, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Citing authority
What wikipedia entry or entries are there, if any that do not cite authority for the information?... oo-- dWs dsaklad@zurich.csail.mit.edu 16:46, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I literally don't understand your question, can you clarify? -- Jmabel | Talk 03:32, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
I think he may be referring to authority in the sense of an expert on a topic, which is missing from the article. Hackwrench 16:15, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] First Empire
Shouldn't the word "First Republic" in the paragraph about France be "First Empire"? It makes no sense to talk about the "Consulate" and then the "First Republic".
[edit] "detains"
What is "The Senator {which detains auctoritas}" intended to mean: the punctuation is utterly unconventional, and "which detains" makes no sense to me here. -- Jmabel | Talk 02:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I suspect it's an attempt to englishize a verb from Roman languages, in Spanish for example it is detentar, and which means to retain something which doesn't belong to one, but which is attributed to one for a time, for example a person renting a place is not the owner, but a mere detentador. That said, I'd take it out. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eulen (talk • contribs) 6 March 2006.
[edit] Divine intervention?
For the umpteenth time, an advocate of divine authority has intervened in the article. In this case, the POV, uncited paragraph said:
The concept or consideration of a being who has authority because of his very existence is difficult for the finite mind. We would like to see evidence of authority before agreeing to accept the direction given by the being claiming absolute and beneficial authority. The premise of a divine being is based on his very existence and is most readily accepted by those who see themselves as in need of direction and connection to one who controls the world and has answers for the problems of the world and beyond. Nature's organization, the stories of antiquity, the unexplanable interventions of providence all help digest the reality of divine authority. It is upon the foundation of divinity that all other authority most makes sense.
I'm sure that if someone wants this in the article then without too much effort they can find something like this in one of the Church Fathers or some comparable Muslim or Jewish theologian, and then quote that person, with citation. However, this theistic view should certainly not be asserted in Wikipedia's narrative voice. - Jmabel | Talk 18:14, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
