What is Power?

[Zion]

What is power?

Is it attained? How is it attained?

What defines power?

What is strength?

How is power valued?

Is power created? What creates power? How is power created?

What distinct something as having power?

[nhoktinvt]

power is ability to make someone do something (i think) 

[Wolfgang Winterkaise]

@Zion 
Power - the ability to influence another person.
Influence - the process of affecting the thoughts, behavior, & feelings of another person.
Authority - the right to influence another person.

Authority is a power or right to make decisions, direct, control and command. It is typically confined to a particular sphere, organization, situation and context. On the distinctions of authority, there are as follows;

• Bureaucratic Authority - Power to enforce a predefined set of rules, regulations and procedures.
• Charismatic Authority - Influence gained by someone with a charismatic personality who is admired, respected or feared.
• Coercive Authority - Power obtained by negative reinforcement such as the threat of force.
• Delegated Authority - Temporary authority that is granted to achieve a particular task or function.
• Expert Authority - The authority of experts in a particular field that is gained through recognition by other experts.
• Formal Authority - Authority based on legal status or position within an organization.
• Governing Bodies - An organization or team that has authority over another organization or team.
• Individual Sovereignty - An individual's right to freedom.
• Informal Authority - The observation that social influence resembles authority as it creates the power to make decisions, direct and control.
• Legal Authority - Authority that extends from the legal system of a sovereign state.
• Petty Authority - The use of authority to justify unreasonable, unfriendly, cruel or arrogant behavior. In some cases, small levels of authority can dramatically change an individual's behavior in negative ways.
• Political Authority - Decision making authority that is associated with elected government officials and the executive management team of organizations.
• Popular Sovereignty - The right of a state to govern a nation by the consent of its people.
• Positional Authority - Authority derived from an individual's position within a hierarchy.
• Public Authority - An administrative body with a mandate to enforce a set of regulations or administer resources
• Totalitarianism - A state that recognizes no limits to its power.
• Traditional Authority - Authority that derives from historical practices as opposed to a rational argument.

[Wolfgang Winterkaise]

 

@Zion
Power is essentially egotism and self-determination, the concept of actualizing one's will onto one's self and one's surroundings. These self-enhancement values related to power and control are more similar to conservation than open-ness to change. In other words, power and control is more similar to the requirement of co-ordinated social interactions and the belief in authority itself which is innately conservative. This calls for the connection of security with power and the value of keeping up with one's own public image and the avoidance of humiliation, also known as social status. Distinctions in social status that relate to excelling in power I think are as follows: This is the work of social inequality and social stratification:

• Position - A formal position in society such as a monarch or a prestigious job title at well known firm.
• Wealth - Wealth and displays of wealth such as wearing expensive fashion brands or living in a posh area.
• Fame - People who are often discussed by others. For example, a celebrity who is often covered in the media.
• Popularity - Status that an individual gains from knowing people. For example, an individual with many friends or someone who knows high status individuals such as celebrities.
• Membership - Membership in a social group such as a subculture. Groups may form unique systems of social status that differ from those of society. For example, a subculture that respects people who consume resources responsibly.
• Accomplishments - Accomplishments such as education level or a high level of achievement in a profession or hobby.
• Intelligence - Individuals who are perceived as intelligent may earn social status.
• Social Skills - Individuals who are good with people tend to be perceived as higher in status. For example, an individual who is funny and outgoing may be perceived as popular.
• Coolness - Self-confidence and a personal presence that people perceive as fashionable, stylish or authentic.
• Altruism - A reputation for doing good things for people and/ or the environment.
• Honors - Honors such as awards and recognition.

Eventually of those people of self-enhancement values, there's one group of elite who achieves cultural hegemony and control the dominant consensus reality and behavioral consequentialism. Control people under their belief system because you cannot reshape a form before it is thought of and labeled in thought. This is not strictly negative or a moral issue of good versus bad but strength versus weakness, order versus chaos. It is valuable. Power is a game you're always playing, so you should learn how to play it. Power is all about becoming a source of value (what people need/ want). In any area of life, there are things that people value, i.e. resources: wealth, services, skills, strength, intelligence... Ask yourself "What do people want?" and become a source of it. 1. Become a source of value. 2. Ignore who wants nothing of you. Let people come to you. 3. Never reveal what you value (Letting others have power over you).
 

I'm working on an essay involving power that I'll post to the forum in the near future. Stay tooned.

[Carl-Richard]

Energy over time (P = E/t)

Edited March 29, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[UnbornTao]

The capacity to accomplish, create or actualize something.

Edited March 31, 2023 by UnbornTao

[Blackjack38]

What is power?

Ability to manage change. Only constant is change.

Condition of having the constant potentiality of impacting a certain form of existence(i. e. asteroid hitting earth has power, but also a person changing his limiting belief.)

[Basman]

@Zion

• Power is to have the ability to master a situation and influence others.
• Power is attained either via good fortune (born to wealthy parents fore example) and/or positioning yourself in your society such that you have authority over others, thus power.
• Strenght is the ability to deal with hardship and have a decisive impact on a situation and goal.
• Power and authority is often dependent on fictional institutions and concepts that are collectively held (money, nations, leadership positions in an organization). Without collective fiction, power comes down to brute force and strength as a leader out of a local group.
  • Power is in a sense created. How many institution exists that exists simply to 
• A person in power is distinguished by:
  • Authority over others and influence (can make others do/believe things).
  • Makes decisions that impact the world in tangible ways.
  • Leadership and responsibility to maintain certain collective/institutional goals.
  • Their position holds a certain prestige.
  • wealth.

For someone to be powerful, someone else has to be powerless. Therefor power is a resource to be gained, atleast over yourself.

[Wolfgang Winterkaise]

1 hour ago, Basman said:

often dependent on fictional institutions and concepts that are collectively held

@Basman I agree. And furthermore, isn't ultimately the belief in money the blood of all these institutions? And what is money? A concept. An illusion. Money is a stored energy potential that follows momentum and the consequence of individual human vision, not a reward in and of itself. Therein lies the problem with the chain of command, or in other-words, a chain of obedience. Because ultimately the finance industry is equally as large if not larger than the world economy and the ultimate requisite variety that props up institutions and entire countries. Imagine how twisted this reality truly is: Money and the monetary system creates and maintains a class system for hierarchical control. Is that not a perfect description of money and its function in society? The finance industry is perhaps the largest case of legal fraud, or as the gods, our gods would put it creatio ex nihilo ~ something from nothing. Talk about sorcery. 

[Basman]

@Wolfgang Winterkaise You might be demoizing money a little. There has always been power indifferences and hierarchy. That is been the case atleast to a certain extent before money was really a thing and will most likely continue to be the case in the future. You have to consider what the alternative is.

The primary function of money is not fraud but to facilitate trade without needing to offer tangible goods. Money is perhaps one of the greatest human inventions if you consider where it took us as a species compared to where we came from.

Before money, you traded by giving something tangible to someone else that they wanted in exhange for something you wanted (I give you 1 cows for 10 chickens). But that trade is highly contingent on both parties having something the other wants. If either one of the parties don't want what the opposing party has, then there is no trade. Then you don't get your needs met through trade. Physical trade is highly dependent on uncontrollable variables.

Money solves all that very elegantly. With money you can "buy" instead of trade, which ends up facilitating a much greater scope of cooperation and deeper degrees of specilization. Now you can be an expert in a niche field without having to worry about growing your own food.

Without money, we go back to the stone ages. While it is true that we have to make money in order survive and that we are in a sense slaves to money, that is no less true then that we are slaves to survival and the desire to live. Money is miles better than no money. And again, you can specialize and choose how you want to make money. There wheren't many option for how you wanted to survive pre-money. You either tended your crops every day, or you die. And god forbid if there was no rain that season. 

Now you get to whine on the internet about capitalism while munching on frosted flakes. The vast majority of goods you depend on have been made by others, facilitated via a transactional process that only money could allow. That's human ingenuity right there.

Edited March 30, 2023 by Basman

[Buck Edwards]

The ability to control a situation and turn it in your favor. 

Very little power can make you oppressed. Too much power can make you corrupt. 

A healthy balance is where power has been used functionally for both self gain and bettering of the environment. 

 

[Wolfgang Winterkaise]

@Basman Good point. I was a bit sensational but still I acknowledge its usefulness. I'm divided between being construct aware of the illusion it is and also benefiting from its survival advantage. They're not mutually exclusive and both are true. Balance is healthy. Of course money is (i) a medium of exchange, (ii) a unit of account, and (iii) a store of value. Imagine a society that lacks money, and in which people have to barter goods with each other. Barter only works when there is a double coincidence of wants; that is, when A wants what B has and B wants what A has. But since such coincidences are likely to be uncommon, a barter economy seems both cumbersome and inefficient. At some point, people will realize that they can trade more easily if they use some intermediate good—money. This intermediate good should ideally be easy to handle, store and transport. It should be easy to measure and divide to facilitate calculations. And it should be difficult to destroy so that it lasts over time.

There's also the credit theory of money: more abstract: money is a social construction rather than a physical commodity. This is well known. Example. The central bank has just created its own digital currency now (CBDC). That is, a promise from someone to grant (or repay) a favor (product or service) to the holder of the token. The issuer is “creditworthy” and the credit is transferable. A sort of social ontology of money: money is the sort of social institution whose existence depends on “collective intentionality”. a standing social rule.

As a social invention it is not without problems in ethics though:

51 minutes ago, Basman said:

While it is true that we have to make money in order survive and that we are in a sense slaves to money, that is no less true then that we are slaves to survival and the desire to live.

Even in normal times, people with very low income or wealth have hardly any access to basic financial services. Commercial banks have little to gain from offering such services to them; there is an elevated risk of loan losses (since the poor lack collateral) and it is costly to administer a large amount of very small loans. Since financial assets are essentially promises of future money a central concept here is that of risk. Hence, the built in bias towards exponential inequality. Exponential inequality. Systematically Exponential... contemplate that as far as power and all of us being a slave to money is concerned.

As a side note, It's not my intention to come across as rude, although I maybe blunt, and I value your feedback. I think we're largely in agreement. Thank you and please continue sharing your points of view. Power and/ or money are fascinating topics and everyone has their own unique input. 

 

Edited March 30, 2023 by Wolfgang Winterkaise

[Wolfgang Winterkaise]

 

Question: Is it always the case that Self-Transcendence (Humility, Benevolence, Universalism) is diametrically apposed to Self-Enhancement (Security, Power [resources & dominance], Achievement)?

 

 

[Basman]

@Wolfgang Winterkaise Sorry if I came of as stand-offish in my last post.

Yes, the point of wealth inequality is a serious issue but is much more tangental on the type of government and rules and regulation in place rather than money in of itself. How much you pay in taxes or free social services available are examples of raising the living standards of the poorest (such as free college, health care, workers rights, etc.).

I don't believe that self-transcendence is necessarily diametrically apposed to self-enchancement. It depends on why you are seeking power. For example, some politicians have a genuine passion and vision for their country while others go into politics for what they can gain from it for themselves.