Any acceptable theory of social power must be able to draw a principled distinction between the power of parents, doctors, and teachers, on the one hand, and the power of robbers, pimps, and drug-pushers, on the other. This paper buttresses the distinction by defending an account of the relationship between power and normative reasons. More precisely, I argue that the distinction between dominating power and power simpliciter depends on the nature of the reasons that power grounds. A dominates B if and only if A's use of her power over B hinders B's ability or willingness to act for reasons independent of that power. Domination is therefore best conceived as a form of disempowering power.
