ABSTRACT
The author considers the essence of Michel Foucault's theory of power relative to a tighter social theory, which broadly mirrors the structure of the power debates. The three dimensions of power, as set out by Steven Lukes, broadly correspond to three levels of theorizing in social theory. The first level consists of agency, the second of structure and the third, the local epistemic tacit knowledge that guides the agents who reproduce these structures. In addition, there is a fourth level, which concerns shaping the social ontological dispositions of social subjects. Relative to Foucault, the third dimension corresponds to his archaeological works and power/knowledge, while the genealogical analysis of the subject formation is four-dimensional. In his critique of Foucault's model, Lukes argues that there is a tendency to equate power with socialization in general. The evolution of the modern forms of the four dimensions of power has both normatively desirable and undesirable aspects.
