A discussion of power, part 3

Though it also gives some strange outputs, the CNP methodology definitely sheds light on what else should be put into power considerations. I'm not sure I like the complexity of the model, however. Kenneth Waltz, in Theory of International Politics, talks about the usefulness of a model for a theory. To summarize, the more complex (and thus usually accurate) the model, the more it is descriptive and the less explanatory. This might not make sense at first, so let me explain. Say we wanted to explain everything that happens in the world. We construct a perfect model, that takes into account every possible variable. In effect, we have created another world. It doesn't help us EXPLAIN anything, only describe it. We can say what causes what and how, but not why. In contrast, the most basic Neo-realist theory about world politics is the anarchic international system. From that, you can explain things. The most basic Marxist theory is that money is the driver of politics. These are elegant theories. They are not perfectly accurate, of course. In fact, they really are barely "accurate" at all, in that they describe almost nothing by themselves, but they let you EXPLAIN what you can observe.

Getting back to quantifying power, the Chinese method seems to describe states very well, it has tons of factors. But in having so many factors, they lose explanatory power. Why did they weight factor X more than Factor Y? How does one compare life expectancy and military spending? Does having a long lifespan really make you more powerful at all? Old people are a net burden on the state, I would imagine a state where everyone lives to 100 (because of great medical technology or healthcare spending) is actually less powerful than one where everyone dies at 65 after being productive their entire life. How much does R&D spending contribute? I've played enough strategy games to know focusing on improving your technology can get you killed when someone with lower tech but more troops attacks and destroys you. Even if they don't do that, they can focus on just stealing your innovations, which is certainly much cheaper. Does being good at spying make you more powerful than being good at research?

There are no good answers to the above questions, which is why modeling state power is so difficult. We can far more easily explain which state has the most powerful military OR economy OR culture/society, but unifying these is a huge challenge, especially in a way that actually explains anything (rather than just describing facts). This is something I want to continue to work on as I move into grad school.