knowledge and power

[fela fan]

I recently read, in the context of implementing national curriculum, a quote that sent me thinking. I liked it, and its message.

It said to the effect that we were left with the predictable battle between those with the power but not the knowledge, and those with the knowledge but not the power.

This is so often the case in so many contexts in life, i was left wondering at the link between power and knowledge, and their apparant inability to work together for the common good.

For example, does having knowledge include the understanding that power is something to be avoided?

Does a self-perceived view of oneself as being less clever or intelligent than others lead to a course in life of gaining one's revenge on those that showed them up when younger?

How can idiots get the power? Why do intelligent people seemingly not want it? If we solved the connundrum, would we solve the problem of constant war?

Many questions, sorry, tough, but i'm hoping it's an area of interest to explore.

 

[omnipotent]

you do know that knowledge is power.

sorry crap answer.

 

[fela fan]

you do know that knowledge is power.

sorry crap answer.

No, not crap answer! I know that phrase, sure, but i wonder if it more accurately describes knowledge as being the self-empowered kind of power?

It is often said that the very people who we need in leadership positions are those that run a mile from such jobs. Whereas we often seem to get idiots who get into these positions of leadership. Have the clever ones decided having power over others is too seductive to avoid abusing, and therefore would be unable to retain their own sanity?

I'm talking in any context - be it at work, or in the corridors of political power.

 

[kyser_soze]

No because there are, amazingly enough, many intelligent people in 'power' and in positions of power.

What you want to be addressing is WHAT knowledge constitutes power, HOW that knowledge is disseminated and WHY people want it/don't want you to have it. For example, the knowledge of how to read was effectively witheld from the majority until a combination of economic and social pressures (capitalism needed upskilling and the quakers/non-conformists etc had a social conscience that said people should be able to read) meant that they got to learn.

The other question about knowledge is what is it's practical application? For example, I might know about LTV and the basic Marxian view of society HOWEVER without tens of thousands behind me to back up any revolutionary urges I might have, outside of academia, message boards and pub/church hall/mates basement meetings the only thing it's gonna cause me is grief because I have understanding without the means to fix something.

Different contexts will show the knowledge/power balance in different ways. A more physical example would be between someone having to lift stuff - one guy does it the hard way and lugs stuff around everywhere, the other guy with knowledge of say, levers can

a. make his own life easier, thus freeing up more time to do non-lugging
b. make his co-workers life easier - but he has the 'power' to choose to do this or not.

In a practical situation, knowledge, or at least information, will always win out - a soldier who has greater knowledge of his enemies tatics, weapons and psychology will beat that enemy;' a politician with a greater command of both policy, stats and the machinations of his/her body politic will carry a huge advantage over a new MP.

'Knowledge is power' is one of those great meaningful/less statements insofar as it's true but doesn't tell you why...

 

[NoEgo]

No, not crap answer! I know that phrase, sure, but i wonder if it more accurately describes knowledge as being the self-empowered kind of power?

It is often said that the very people who we need in leadership positions are those that run a mile from such jobs. Whereas we often seem to get idiots who get into these positions of leadership. Have the clever ones decided having power over others is too seductive to avoid abusing, and therefore would be unable to retain their own sanity?

I'm talking in any context - be it at work, or in the corridors of political power.

Not so much as self-empowered but more self-enlightened about it given that power is a duality?

 

[NoEgo]

In a practical situation, knowledge, or at least information, will always win out - a soldier who has greater knowledge of his enemies tatics, weapons and psychology will beat that enemy;' a politician with a greater command of both policy, stats and the machinations of his/her body politic will carry a huge advantage over a new MP.

'Knowledge is power' is one of those great meaningful/less statements insofar as it's true but doesn't tell you why...

Basically everything comes down to game theory does it not? It's all about the Nash Equilibrium...

 

[fela fan]

Not so much as self-empowered but more self-enlightened about it given that power is a duality?

I'd guess we're meaning the same thing by self-empowered and self-enlightened. They're just both symbols anyway! But yeah, take your point, and that power is a duality.

I tried a thread outlining this duality once mate, but no-one picked up on it. I think understanding it is the key to everything, including this power and knowledge connundrum i've brought up.

Trust all is well with you mate.

 

[fela fan]

The other question about knowledge is what is it's practical application? For example, I might know about LTV and the basic Marxian view of society HOWEVER without tens of thousands behind me to back up any revolutionary urges I might have, outside of academia, message boards and pub/church hall/mates basement meetings the only thing it's gonna cause me is grief because I have understanding without the means to fix something.

Hah, i like that question, what practical use is knowledge. For me the main use of knowledge (something i've actively sought since i could read) is realising that it has no real use whatsoever. It is not the highest attainment available for humans. The only good thing you can do about knowledge is open your mouth, speak truthfully, and let people accept what you say, go away and think about it, or just reject it.

Freedom and happiness are to me the highest things for a human to attain. They are not dependent on knowledge, but they to a great extent are dependent on not being exposed to power abusers.

Which is not fucking easy when you are exposed to politics and workplaces where there are bosses...

 

[kyser_soze]

Freedom and happiness are to me the highest things for a human to attain. They are not dependent on knowledge, but they to a great extent are dependent on not being exposed to power abusers

This would of course exclude the knowledge of how to provide food and shelter, maintain basic levels of sanitation, ideally decent medical techniques.

Ever hear of an idea called the dependency principle? That at some point, as an organic system, humans need some basic things and that without them all the great higher purposes (F&H) aren't worth shite. There's a great joke on a similar basis:

All the parts of the body are having an argument to decide who is the most important body part.

'I'm the most important,' said the brain 'for I am the seat of consciousness and without me we wouldn't be in this rather thin joke/analogy situation'

'Ahh,' pipes up the heart 'but I am the most important for without me you wouldn't have blood and oxygen and would die'

And so all the body parts continue in this vein until we get to the bowels. ON making it's claim, all the other body parts scoff, so the bowels decide to go on strike.

Within a week the rest of the body submit as it's starting to stop functioning.

Another way of looking at it would be say, a super advanced computer. No matter how complex and intelligent it was as soon as you unplugged it it's just an inert bunch of wires, silicon and other landfill-tastic materials.

So one practical use for knowledge is survival.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Fela, if you haven't read any of his stuff I'd recommend some Eric Fromm, ive recently started reading his stuff and he has much to say on this subject. To borrow a quote or two of his,

"The ordinary man with extraordinary power is the chief danger for mankind--not the fiend or the sadist."

"The most abominable of all human impulses, the need to use another person for one's own ends by virtue of one's power over that person, is little more than a refined form of cannibalism."

edit - in fact id recommend his stuff for many reasons, especially those with anarchistic thoughts with whom he will most certainly strike a chord.

 

[NoEgo]

Fela, if you haven't read any of his stuff I'd recommend some Eric Fromm, ive recently started reading his stuff and he has much to say on this subject. To borrow a quote or two of his,



edit - in fact id recommend his stuff for many reasons, especially those with anarchistic thoughts with whom he will most certainly strike a chord.

To know these things - to know when to use power and to recognize when it is being abused requires knoweledge. Hence knowledge is power.

A main point is that SOMEONE has to hold power. Can a powerless state exist? I think not. If no-one had any power, it would only be a matter of time before someone took advantage of that fact and abused power in order to do as he pleases. Power then should only be held by those who are most fair, just and wisest around. With great power comes great responsibility.

 

[NoEgo]

I'd guess we're meaning the same thing by self-empowered and self-enlightened. They're just both symbols anyway! But yeah, take your point, and that power is a duality.

I tried a thread outlining this duality once mate, but no-one picked up on it. I think understanding it is the key to everything, including this power and knowledge connundrum i've brought up.

Trust all is well with you mate.

Well ta thanks. Which thread was this?

 

[fela fan]

Well ta thanks. Which thread was this?

Ah, it was more than a while back mate, maybe i'll try it again soon. Let me clear my head first, it's fucking chock full dealing with a psycopathic and destructive boss at work at the minute.

 

[fela fan]

Fela, if you haven't read any of his stuff I'd recommend some Eric Fromm, ive recently started reading his stuff and he has much to say on this subject. To borrow a quote or two of his,



edit - in fact id recommend his stuff for many reasons, especially those with anarchistic thoughts with whom he will most certainly strike a chord.

I shall head off to my favourite second hand bookshop this very weekend and get something! I've heard the name before, but can't remember why. I need a good read at the minute.

 

[fela fan]

This would of course exclude the knowledge of how to provide food and shelter, maintain basic levels of sanitation, ideally decent medical techniques.

Ever hear of an idea called the dependency principle? That at some point, as an organic system, humans need some basic things and that without them all the great higher purposes (F&H) aren't worth shite.

Maintaining survival, yes, we do need to exclude that. I've assumed that as a taken. Mainly coz our world provides them for us.

I know that those in power also have knowledge, but it may well be that those ones are the ones who exercise their power fairly and justly.

What i do know is often, these kinds of people don't get to management/political type jobs, precisely coz a certain knowledge tells them what an awful bloody life they'd be choosing for themselves.

I'm one of those kinds of people and to think of all the sport and music and nature and popping round to see mates and all similar stuff that i have in my life, and then to imagine being a blair who has to face the job he has just about every day, well fuck man, no contest! All that lying spinning conniving and conspiring and fighting on a daily basis, spending an inordinate amount of time planning your life instead of living it, and going to bed knowing that you have had thousands of people killed in your name: what kind of bloody life is that?!!

That's why when i occasionally (and luckily that's all it is) hear or see bush or blair speaking i just see insanity.

 

[fela fan]

Great recommendation barking! He hits the nail right on the head. Cheers.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Great recommendation barking! He hits the nail right on the head. Cheers.

Ah good, what did you buy mate? Ive been trying to get my hands on 'The Sane Society' but cant find it - will have to put an order in.

 

[fela fan]

Ah good, what did you buy mate? Ive been trying to get my hands on 'The Sane Society' but cant find it - will have to put an order in.

Didn't get to the bookshop yet, but read a bit online. I reckon i've been recommended him before, but then forgot.

That's one of the ones that appealed to me. What he writes for is knowledge, the knowledge of having awareness.

To me that can well likely mean those with the power lack awareness. It is fromm's kind of knowledge that cannot share a platform with power. Only one can get its way, not both. Power abusers do so to counter their non-awareness.

Just some conjecturing. But i look forward to getting a couplde of his books.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Didn't get to the bookshop yet, but read a bit online. I reckon i've been recommended him before, but then forgot.

That's one of the ones that appealed to me. What he writes for is knowledge, the knowledge of having awareness.

To me that can well likely mean those with the power lack awareness. It is fromm's kind of knowledge that cannot share a platform with power. Only one can get its way, not both. Power abusers do so to counter their non-awareness.

Just some conjecturing. But i look forward to getting a couplde of his books.

Id recommend his stuff to anyone who hasnt read it, especially anarchists - id recommend looking at this http://eqi.org/fromm.htm and reading down from 'On Disobedience' (do a search) i found it very relevant and interesting.

For centuries kings, priests, feudal lords, industrial bosses and parents have insisted that obedience is a virtue and that disobedience is a vice. In order to introduce another point of view, let us set against this position the following statement: human history began with an act of disobedience, and it is not unlikely that it will be, terminated by an act of obedience.

Man has continued to evolve by acts of disobedience. Not only was his spiritual development possible only because there were men who dared to say no to the powers that be in the name of their conscience or their faith, but also his intellectual development was dependent on the capacity for being disobedient--disobedient to authorities who tried to muzzle new thoughts and to the authority of long-established opinions which declared a change to be nonsense.

 

[fela fan]

Id recommend his stuff to anyone who hasnt read it, especially anarchists - id recommend looking at this http://eqi.org/fromm.htm and reading down from 'On Disobedience' (do a search) i found it very relevant and interesting.

Maybe we should start a fromm thread! That is great, reading about disobedience, i've had that as my guide for as long as i can remember!

I feel like this thread might evolve and delve deeper into what knowledge is, what we can do with it, and which kind is useful, and which kind leads to power abuse.

But there again it might not.

But i'm now interested in the link between obedience and the ability for those in power to manipulate and abuse it.

And disobedience leading to others who run a mile from positions of power...

 

[Barking_Mad]

Maybe we should start a fromm thread! That is great, reading about disobedience, i've had that as my guide for as long as i can remember!

I feel like this thread might evolve and delve deeper into what knowledge is, what we can do with it, and which kind is useful, and which kind leads to power abuse.

But there again it might not.

But i'm now interested in the link between obedience and the ability for those in power to manipulate and abuse it.

And disobedience leading to others who run a mile from positions of power...

Ive not read much philosophy but Fromm, from what ive read, just speaks for me basic truths. We all have that innate knowledge inside us, you just have to cut through the bullshit. Ive not had time (for instance) to go back and read the "What party are you in?" thread on the UK(?) forum thread where i questioned the need for a party of any sort, as for me its all bollocks - i dont need dogma of any sort to guide me as we all know what's fundamentally right and wrong.

Ok im drunk and im sure some philosophical clever arse will rip this to pieces, but hey........

ps a Fromm thread is a good idea, i was going to start one the other day only i couldnt think from what angle to start it from(m) haha

 

[fela fan]

Ive not read much philosophy but Fromm, from what ive read, just speaks for me basic truths. We all have that innate knowledge inside us, you just have to cut through the bullshit. Ive not had time (for instance) to go back and read the "What party are you in?" thread on the UK(?) forum thread where i questioned the need for a party of any sort, as for me its all bollocks - i dont need dogma of any sort to guide me as we all know what's fundamentally right and wrong.

Ok im drunk and im sure some philosophical clever arse will rip this to pieces, but hey........

ps a Fromm thread is a good idea, i was going to start one the other day only i couldnt think from what angle to start it from(m) haha

Yeah, but being drunk takes us nearer to our unconsciousness mate...

[heh, i didn't mean crashing out either!]

All dogma is anathema to finding out the worthwhile things in life. Dogma blinds us to it.

I too have read hardly anything about philosophy. It is limiting, but at least positive unlike politics and religion. Real philosophy can only be gained by living the experiences oneself. Otherwise it's someone else's theory x or theory y, and no practice.

It is society that blocks our sense of innateness, our individuality, and that is a crime.

Fromm makes sense in everything i've read so far. Fucking great call mate.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Yeah, but being drunk takes us nearer to our unconsciousness mate...

[heh, i didn't mean crashing out either!]

All dogma is anathema to finding out the worthwhile things in life. Dogma blinds us to it.

I too have read hardly anything about philosophy. It is limiting, but at least positive unlike politics and religion. Real philosophy can only be gained by living the experiences oneself. Otherwise it's someone else's theory x or theory y, and no practice.

It is society that blocks our sense of innateness, our individuality, and that is a crime.

Fromm makes sense in everything i've read so far. Fucking great call mate.

Yeah, agreed. Glad you like it, i just try to shuffle this shit along you know.....

 

[Barking_Mad]

Apolgies for the quotes but for me i sometimes read stuff thats just what i was always thinking but never managed to put into words... (from the above link)

Why is man so prone to obey and why is it so difficult for him to disobey? As long as I am obedient to the power of the State, the Church, or public opinion, I feel safe and protected. In fact it makes little difference what power it is that I am obedient to. It is always an institution, or men, who use force in one form or another and who fraudulently claim omniscience and omnipotence.

My obedience makes me part of the power I worship, and hence I feel strong. I can make no error, since it decides for me; I cannot be alone, because it watches over me; I cannot commit a sin, because it does not let me do so, and even if I do sin, the punishment is only the way of returning to the almighty power. In order to disobey, one must have the courage to be alone, to err and to sin. But courage is not enough. The capacity for courage depends on a person's state of development. Only if a person has emerged from mother's lap and father's commands, only if he has emerged as a fully developed individual and thus has acquired the capacity to think and feel for himself, only then can he have the courage to say "no" to power, to disobey.

A person can become free through acts of disobedience by learning to say no to power. But not only is the capacity for disobedience the condition for freedom; freedom is also the condition for disobedience. If I am afraid of freedom, I cannot dare to say "no," I cannot have the courage to be disobedient. Indeed, freedom and the capacity for disobedience are inseparable; hence any social, political, and religious system which proclaims freedom, yet stamps out disobedience, cannot speak the truth.

 

[fela fan]

Barking, for once one of my threads i've started here has thrown up something concrete! Something for me to go and chew on in a big way. Those quotes illustrate and confirm my beliefs about power and knowledge.

But it's only when i see what fromm is writing, what he says about disobedience and freedom, that i am now able to articulate it myself better than before. From those quotes, we can see how impossible it would be for some who has freedom to then take a position of power.

I've always viewed freedom as being in a position in life where you have nothing you've got to do. But i'm now going to go away and see how fromm's obedience fits into the equation.

Good stuff.

 

[thestraightman]

The ordinary man with extraordinary power is the chief danger for mankind--not the fiend or the sadist.

How does he justify this? Sounds like arse.

 

[fela fan]

How does he justify this? Sounds like arse.

He can't (he's dead) and nor does he need to. It's up to you to try and see why he might be saying such a thing.

A wise man with extraordinary power? Probably a person who won't abuse that power he has over others.

An ordinary man? Well, what is 'ordinary'? One would have to refer to the context in which he made his comments.

Sadists and fiends? Not likely at all to be a danger to mankind. Just to a few people. Society will rope them in quick enough.

It might be worthwhile looking at the more recent history of leaders, and looking to see if the better leaders, as characterised by working for the advancement of their people, also were considered 'ordinary' in their background prior to becoming leader, or whether they were considered to have been wise in some way before getting the job.

Bush is ordinary in probably all ways except his family connections, yet he is a horrible and current thread to mankind. I reckon we could put blair and howard (australia) in the same category. What of hussein? Mugabe? The burmese chap? The current iranian man? The n korean man?

How often do we get leaders with knowledge/wisdom but who don't abuse their power to the detriment of the population?

 

[thestraightman]

Blair horrible? Sure, he's been responsible for a few thousand deaths.

But if you take that line, the only leader who isn't horrible is the Dalai Llama, and thats only because he's to exiled and shaking hands with hippies 24/7

Being responsible for a few deaths comes with the territory of being leader of millions.

If you look at the greater scheme of things(historically), Blair has had an extraordinarily blood free reign.

I would say that Blair has spent at least half of his time working for the betterment of the people through the NHS and teaching reforms etc. I'm sure he spent the other half pandering to big business, and using vulgar displays of power on smaller nations to keep the status quo intact. But these are the harsh realities of governing a state, its rather like a troop of lions, if you don't look buff, you'll be taken out by the young pretenders.

I admire you idealism, and would also like to see a Solomonesque leader taking us to new heights of peace and unity, however, I think a bit of compromise between right wing aggression and left wing nurturing is the best policy.

Anyway, fuck it, thats not what were talking about, we're talking about mass murdering leaders. Why claim that the likes of Stalin and Hitler are ordinary men, it is not ordinary to systematically wipe out millions of people. If it were ordinary, then why aren't more men murderers(albiet on a smaller scale)? Huh

Now I know what your going to say, "oh they were normal men, ol' Joe and 'Dolph, its just that power corrupts"

No, they were freaks. Ask Jarvis cocker,

famous people are unusual, they are driven by the need to have their wobbly self esteem balanced and verified with power.[unquote] They are famous precisely because they are unusual. The same can be said of world leaders, I'll see my Stalin and raise a Polpot and a Somoza, these were monsters who's ambition and tactical/oritary skills propelled them to be in a position to carry their ultimate fantasies and desires.

The bottom line is, if they were ordinary, would I have spent 45 minutes writing this post?

 

[Barking_Mad]

You spent 45 minutes writing that?

You have a point but you dont need to go down to mass murdering level to see the effect power can have on people and the effects it has on millions of individuals. You could cite examples of government/international policy that have affected millions of people in very negative ways. Look at trade for instance - I doubt many of the world bureaucrats who want to dump wheat on small countries are truly evil and sadistic, but given the power to do so (along with it a removal of personal responsibility due to it being shared about) then millions of people are suffering from not being able to sell their home grown wheat. Im sure you could point to many others but its early and im half asleep

And yes, Stalin and Pol Pot weren't 'ordinary', but the power they had made them extraordinarily dangerous. Works in both contexts I guess.

 

[kyser_soze]

Anyone who wants an example of how power affects anyone should have to deal with local bureacrats, tax officers and parking wardens. You don't need to go to the extremes of genocide to see this!!