The ability to get someone or something to do something that it would normally have reservations or resistance against.
Also, work over time.
Also, work over time.
Poll: What is power?
- Thread starter Lord Garnaat
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I like keeping large concepts as simple and intuitive as possible: power is the ability to do something. Being more powerful means being able to do more. Having power over people means having the ability to get others to do something.
I like this because it's somewhat similar to the definition of power in physics, which is the rate of energy transfer, where energy is defined as the ability to do work.
I like this because it's somewhat similar to the definition of power in physics, which is the rate of energy transfer, where energy is defined as the ability to do work.
Of the options given, the first 5 are merely means to power, and the 6th, power is power, does not seem to give us a meaningful or satisfactory answer. Discussing power in a philosophical sense, an individuals power reflects their ability to act in accordance to their will. It is our ability to both inflict and resist change in the world.
I would usually go with knowledge is power, but....
People are power, if you can control them you control the world. You can obtain knowledge from people, and if they follow you you have power. If I could cure cancer, but someone with influence convinced people that my cure was unethical then I would go nowhere. And usually connections is worth more than money or knowledge.
People are power, if you can control them you control the world. You can obtain knowledge from people, and if they follow you you have power. If I could cure cancer, but someone with influence convinced people that my cure was unethical then I would go nowhere. And usually connections is worth more than money or knowledge.
Power is influence and the ability to do so.
1. For starters, money is too narrow a category. A better term would be "material wealth", or possibly "belongings". But in any case, it influences people by appealing to their greed.
2. Right, or authority, influences people by appealing to their respect, fear, or disdain for it.
3. Knowledge on its own is not going to be influencing anybody. But if you combine knowledge with a skilled public speaker, you can influence an audience in various ways such as riling them up, making them fearful, and so on. If you combine knowledge with a corporate CEO, you can keep on finding new ways to influence the market in order to successively earn more money.
4. People can influence other people by, for example, signalling that they are willing to place their trust in somebody, making that somebody a person that people will be more willing to pay attention to.
5. Strength (physical and mental) can influence others to respect or fear you due to the example you set, whenether it is because you have the strength of will to keep your calm in a tense situation, or if you can kill a boar with only your bare hands.
6. Having power will naturally lend credence to the idea that you should be paid attention to, thus influencing people to listen to you. This one is very closely linked to number 2, to the point that I would say they are one and the same.
Obviously, it is also very important to look at how these intersect with each other.
1. For starters, money is too narrow a category. A better term would be "material wealth", or possibly "belongings". But in any case, it influences people by appealing to their greed.
2. Right, or authority, influences people by appealing to their respect, fear, or disdain for it.
3. Knowledge on its own is not going to be influencing anybody. But if you combine knowledge with a skilled public speaker, you can influence an audience in various ways such as riling them up, making them fearful, and so on. If you combine knowledge with a corporate CEO, you can keep on finding new ways to influence the market in order to successively earn more money.
4. People can influence other people by, for example, signalling that they are willing to place their trust in somebody, making that somebody a person that people will be more willing to pay attention to.
5. Strength (physical and mental) can influence others to respect or fear you due to the example you set, whenether it is because you have the strength of will to keep your calm in a tense situation, or if you can kill a boar with only your bare hands.
6. Having power will naturally lend credence to the idea that you should be paid attention to, thus influencing people to listen to you. This one is very closely linked to number 2, to the point that I would say they are one and the same.
Obviously, it is also very important to look at how these intersect with each other.
Power is inner peace.
Woo!! Eastern philosophy ftw!!
No, but seriously. When one is happy with oneself, and content with themselves, no matter the damage done to their physical form, you can never have true power over them. Thats why Buddhists are so fucking kick ass. When they're real that is. Not posers.
Woo!! Eastern philosophy ftw!!
No, but seriously. When one is happy with oneself, and content with themselves, no matter the damage done to their physical form, you can never have true power over them. Thats why Buddhists are so fucking kick ass. When they're real that is. Not posers.
In my belief, Power is capability, or the capacity to act. It is also a great or telling force.
Power is a great many things but, in its purest form, Power is inherently indiscriminatory and destructive. Any person can wield Power, just give them the means to acquire it and their desires will take care of the rest.
For the gaming nerd (such as myself) it is also the top triangle of the Triforce.
Power is a great many things but, in its purest form, Power is inherently indiscriminatory and destructive. Any person can wield Power, just give them the means to acquire it and their desires will take care of the rest.
For the gaming nerd (such as myself) it is also the top triangle of the Triforce.
I guess that's sort of what I'm getting at- even if free will is a thing, your interactions with the free wills of everyone and everything impact your own so heavily that they're arguably the main force behind your decision making, even if you do 'decide' yourself. You wouldn't have made decision X if someone else on the other side of the planet hadn't made decision Y, etc.JoshGod said:
Like the bible says, Adam and Eve ate from the tree of KNOWLEDGE. Knowledge is power, and god didn't want them having it. The only reason we CAN reason, is that our ancestors ate from that tree.
Of course, I'm KNOWLEDGEABLE enough to know that the bible is bullshit, just something to ponder.
Of course, I'm KNOWLEDGEABLE enough to know that the bible is bullshit, just something to ponder.
Science and Technology and Resources.
Power is ability - the more "abilities" you have, the more power you have. The US is powerful because it can build drones that can fly virtually by themselves and deploy missiles. Science and technology created that ability. Resources (Materials, Minerals, Human Beings) are necessary to put that science and technology to use. If you have abundant supply of those three things, and are willing to use them to achieve victory, you will win against any foe that has less of those things (provided you are ruthless enough)
The more science, technology and resources you have, the more power you have. Power alone doesn't always grant victory, however. America was and still is, far more powerful than Vietnam in every single way. But the US left Vietnam because the Vietnamese cared about the conflict more than the Americans, were willing to accept millions dead and a nation ruined to achieve Victory. The US COULD have won in Vietnam - if it had adopted a scorch-earth, kill-anything-that-moves, invade-the-north-en-mass approach. But the cost, in terms of casualties, lives, morality and money would have been too large. Also they didn't want to bring the USSR into the conflict.
So even if a nation has more power, that doesn't mean they'll necessarily win every fight.
Power is ability - the more "abilities" you have, the more power you have. The US is powerful because it can build drones that can fly virtually by themselves and deploy missiles. Science and technology created that ability. Resources (Materials, Minerals, Human Beings) are necessary to put that science and technology to use. If you have abundant supply of those three things, and are willing to use them to achieve victory, you will win against any foe that has less of those things (provided you are ruthless enough)
The more science, technology and resources you have, the more power you have. Power alone doesn't always grant victory, however. America was and still is, far more powerful than Vietnam in every single way. But the US left Vietnam because the Vietnamese cared about the conflict more than the Americans, were willing to accept millions dead and a nation ruined to achieve Victory. The US COULD have won in Vietnam - if it had adopted a scorch-earth, kill-anything-that-moves, invade-the-north-en-mass approach. But the cost, in terms of casualties, lives, morality and money would have been too large. Also they didn't want to bring the USSR into the conflict.
So even if a nation has more power, that doesn't mean they'll necessarily win every fight.