Power

[wmw999 2,141]

Humans seem to be bred to want power. Whether it's
- money (see all the capitalism/Enron/etc threads)
- child-raising (see the paternity thread)
- politics (see all the election threads)
- right and wrong (see all the religion threads)
- nationalism (see all the US should kick butt)

they want to know that they are more powerful than someone else.

Machiavelli said something about power corrupting, and absolute power corrupting absolutely. It's human nature. How do we, as a human race, determine what's important? Our environment has changed so much -- travel is easier, and communication is easier, so our worlds are bigger and our scope of perceived power is much greater. Maybe it was easier when each village had a strong man, and that guy was happy to be the asshole among 150 people.

Thoughts?

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[shropshire 0]

Not entirely sure that I agree.. least not for me at any rate.

I don't think that I've every actively sought power per se .... I never wanted teams of people working for me (probably a responsibility thing). And I've always wanted to work for myself (I do - sort of .. I'm an independent contractor, but I guess that you always work for someone ... but I can chose who and if I stay).

My marriage is a partnership of equals. So nope,, I'm not and never have been power hungry and I probably tend to avoid power seeking people..... Maybe I'm just odd

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[banesanura 1]

Power gives purpose.

We as animals have already accomplished what we are already biologically supposed to do. Procreate and provide for the young and ourselves. Outside of that....well its open game.

Which comes power- Everyone has their own idea what power is.

It can be religion, material, verbal or no verbal exchange, it can be excelling in a class or subject. Power can be helping others in need, or helping yourself. Power is so subjective like most of the things that we do and say....

Since we've evolved out of our primitive nature its just something for just to strive for.

Best Girl Scout Ever.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Maybe it was easier when each village had a strong man, and that guy was happy to be the asshole among 150 people.

Oh yeah? Well, my village strong man can kick your village strong man's ass!

[wayneflorida 0]

Not to be picky
below is a google search

Origin

This arose as a quotation by John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, first Baron Acton (1834–1902). The historian and moralist, who was otherwise known simply as Lord Acton, expressed this opinion in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887:

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

[feuergnom 22]

Quote

Since we've evolved out of our primitive nature

are you sure about this?

The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle

dudeist skydiver # 666

[vortexring 0]

Well; 'How do we, as a human race, determine what's important?'

Perhaps it depends on what exact power you mean?

"Lets start with a closer look at what 'power' is. Power is typically thought of has having a certain attribute which gives one person more influence over another. This attribute could be intelligence or experience, it could be job title, or perhaps money. According to most social psychologists, there are five types of power: coercive, reward, legitimate, expert, and referent."

http://allpsych.com/psychology101/obedience_power.html

Although illegitimate use of power is where I think your issue lies.

"Power activates a person's behavioral approach system and underlies our motivation to act, while powerlessness activates our behavioral inhibition system to restrict action and risk-taking," said Galinsky. "But, in illegitimate power scenarios, the powerless are more likely to act without direction in an attempt to change the situation, and the powerful may inhibit their actions for fear of losing their undeserved seat at the top."

http://esciencenews.com/articles/2008/06/16/when.powerless.rise

What does that make you think of?

Simply, having power can make it easier to get what you want.

Individuals in the human race know what's important for themselves. I'd imagine we've a vaguely similiar idea of what is important for the human race - but I reckon too many are thinking more on what's important for ourselves.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[skybytch 259]

Quote

It's human nature.

Is it?

Consider that humans appear to have lived without the concept of a "state" (politics, nationalism), without money, without private property, and without worldwide domination by a few organized religions for thousands of years prior to the Agricultural Revolution and the advent of "civilization." Could it not be that "human nature" is really to be more concerned with the well-being of those we care about (family, kinship ties) than with the accumulation of wealth and power?

[billvon 2,421]

>Consider that humans appear to have lived without the concept of a
>"state" (politics, nationalism), without money, without private property,
>and without worldwide domination by a few organized religions for
>thousands of years prior to the Agricultural Revolution and the advent of
>"civilization."

Not sure about that. I think humans have always had a sense of "mine." Monkeys and even birds do. And humans naturally gravitate towards leaders - and again, leaders/alpha males/packs/pods/flocks/herds are common in the animal world.

[skybytch 259]

Quote

I think humans have always had a sense of "mine."

We probably have, but from the reading of history that I've done in the past few years it seems that in the days prior to the Agricultural Revolution, and in the few hunter/gatherer societies that survived after civilization took hold, "mine" appears to have been more connected to the family/tribe instead of to individuals. Bob may have "owned" his stone axehead, but the fruits of his labors were shared with others of his kin group or tribe, not tucked away where only he had access to them. It was when we started to become settled farmers instead of hunter/gatherer nomads that the concept of private property became vitally important.

Prior to the first civilizations (Mesopotamia, China, the Indus Valley, the Olmecs, etc), there is no evidence that money or powerful states existed, nor is there evidence that the societies that did exist were anywhere near as socially stratified or as strictly hierarchical as were (and are) those that followed. Without written records it is impossible to know or prove, but is it not possible that in more egalitarian societies the concept of power was unknown? Perhaps those "natural leaders" had no special status other than what was needed to deal with a particular situation and those "natural followers" were not looked down upon or considered to be lacking anything as they are today.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Consider that humans appear to have lived without the concept of a "state" (politics, nationalism), without money, without private property, and without worldwide domination by a few organized religions for thousands of years prior to the Agricultural Revolution and the advent of "civilization." Could it not be that "human nature" is really to be more concerned with the well-being of those we care about (family, kinship ties) than with the accumulation of wealth and power?

That was true back then.

But there were still conflicts. When another tribe migrated to your region and started taking wildlife that you depended upon to feed your own tribe, then warfare erupted. Then there were tribes like the Apache and Comanche, who decided it was easier to take things from others by force, then to get them yourself. I've seen plenty of cave paintings showing people with arrows sticking out of them, indicating warfare. They fought over resources back then just as we do now. The only difference is they fought their neighbors for game land, and we fight our neighbors for oil land.

And since evil does exist in human nature, and there are people who will want to take the stuff you need to survive, you better work on being powerful enough to defend yourself.

Or you'll end up like the Karankawa. What? You never heard of that Indian tribe? Uh-huh, because they weren't powerful enough to defend what was theirs. So now they don't exist any more.

[Capt.Slog 0]

Quote

Not to be picky
below is a google search

Origin

This arose as a quotation by John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, first Baron Acton (1834–1902). The historian and moralist, who was otherwise known simply as Lord Acton, expressed this opinion in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887:

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

That assumes a very narrow definition of "great". I would submit that the following undeniably great men were no "badder" than the average Joe:

Albert Einstein
Leonardo da Vinci
Michaelangelo
Charles Darwin
Ghandi
Jonas Salk
Alexander Fleming

[wayneflorida 0]

Quote

Quote

Not to be picky
below is a google search

Origin

This arose as a quotation by John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, first Baron Acton (1834–1902). The historian and moralist, who was otherwise known simply as Lord Acton, expressed this opinion in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887:

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

That assumes a very narrow definition of "great". I would submit that the following undeniably great men were no "badder" than the average Joe:

Albert Einstein
Leonardo da Vinci
Michaelangelo
Charles Darwin
Ghandi
Jonas Salk
Alexander Fleming

Agree, Lord Acton probably could have picked a better word than "great".

[riddler 0]

To be fair, he did say "almost always". For every Einstein, there's hundreds of "great" men that ain't so great.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD