It also looks at current and potential issues and expands the focus on observable conflict to those types that might be observed openly or when hidden. However, the two-dimensional still focuses on subjective interests and even grievances. Finally, the three-dimensional covers a wide area of critique. It explores the weaknesses of the one-dimensional view and the two dimensional view and tries to find out a better analysis of power. Luke explains that thought control takes the form of control of information, control of mass media and the process of socialization. Through his analysis, the society is able to get a detailed understanding of power.
Max Weber defined power as the probability of individuals realizing their wills despite the resistance of others. Weber insists that the people in authority take advantage of the others due to their power. However, Steven Luke criticizes Weber’s definition because exercise of power may involve the decision-making and control over political agenda. Steven disagrees with the idea that people’s resistance to authority defines power (Luke 1973). Through Luke’s analysis, Weber’s definition of power is seen as too restrictive to one particular area as opposed to being viewed in a more general term.
After careful analysis of the one dimensional and two dimensional view of power, Steven Luke came up with the three dimensional view. Using his ideologies, the three dimensional view of power has proved to be an important aspect in the political and sociological views of the society. It is for this reason that the three dimensional view of power outshines the one-dimensional and the two dimensional view of power. The three dimensional view of power has the following advantages:
Unlike the one dimensional where it involves the focus on behavior, Luke focuses on decision making over control. In the one dimensional, Dahl described power as