Contingent influence demands a code regulating motivation transmission

Evidence

It is difficult to encapsulate this problem in a definition which states categorically what power is and is not. The terms of the problem, however, evoke distinctive and describable sets of circumstances. One can state that the greater the extent to which influence becomes contingent, on account of it being recognized as an action whose selectivity refers only to the activation and guidance of someone else’s action, the less the extent to which a natural-situational congruence of interest can be subsumed; that the more problematical the motivation becomes and the more necessary a code which regulates the conditions of transmission of selection and the attribution of personal motives. — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 607

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the condition under which a power code becomes necessary: when influence is recognized as selection guiding another’s action rather than natural congruence of interest.
• XREF: Stevens’s total deference to Darlington is precisely the case where natural-situational interest congruence fails and only an internalized power code sustains obligation.