Suppose it's just the king and a servant in isolation. The king tells the servant what to do, and the servant obeys -- not out of fear or hope for reward, but just out of loyalty or because he thinks that's his place or somesuch. It seems like the king has a kind of power over the servant: he can certainly get the servant to do stuff he doesn't really want to do. Indeed, the servant may feel he, in some sense, has to obey. But I don't think this kind of power fits your official definition.
Interesting. I like these thought experiments because they put the ideas to the test. In this case, it seems like the notion of loyalty is, at least in some sense, a belief in the head of the servant ("I believe I owe the king my service.") and maybe a reciprocal belief in the head of the king ("I believe the servant owes me his service.") So I think I would try to defend the view that it's still the beliefs that are doing the work here, establishing the power. But, yes, I think in the case of just two people, the idea breaks down a bit because the notion really is about shared beliefs in a group. So I would say the beliefs of the participants are doing the work, not the surrounding group, in your hypothetical.
Suppose it's just the king and a servant in isolation. The king tells the servant what to do, and the servant obeys -- not out of fear or hope for reward, but just out of loyalty or because he thinks that's his place or somesuch. It seems like the king has a kind of power over the servant: he can certainly get the servant to do stuff he doesn't really want to do. Indeed, the servant may feel he, in some sense, has to obey. But I don't think this kind of power fits your official definition.
Interesting. I like these thought experiments because they put the ideas to the test. In this case, it seems like the notion of loyalty is, at least in some sense, a belief in the head of the servant ("I believe I owe the king my service.") and maybe a reciprocal belief in the head of the king ("I believe the servant owes me his service.") So I think I would try to defend the view that it's still the beliefs that are doing the work here, establishing the power. But, yes, I think in the case of just two people, the idea breaks down a bit because the notion really is about shared beliefs in a group. So I would say the beliefs of the participants are doing the work, not the surrounding group, in your hypothetical.
I think that's basically right. But the official definition invokes the use of force or reward, which isn't at play here.