The will to Power - What is power?

Quantum Quack

Quantum Quack

Life's a tease...
Valued Senior Member
In attempting to understand the notions put forward by F. Nietzsche [1860's] regarding the "will to power" I find that the concept of power is left rather oblique and unexplained in itself and whilst the notion is appealing in itself the idea of "power" and "empowerment" by self and others appears yet to be thrashed out properly. Of course I may be mistaken and no doubt there is much said about exactly "what is power and empowerment".
The will to power (German: "der Wille zur Macht") is widely seen as a prominent concept in the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. The will to power describes what Nietzsche may have believed to be the main driving force in man; achievement, ambition, the striving to reach the highest possible position in life; these are all manifestations of the will to power.
Click to expand...

I was wondering if other forum members had something to contribute to a discussion on "the will to power" as described by Nietzsche, other philosophers of old and Modern psychology/philosophy of today.

Questions I have in mind:
  • Is it simply the power of influence and the desire to achieve more of it?
  • If so the power of influence over what?
  • Is this "will to power" manifested in the socially unacceptable "power of Influence that those suffering "psychosis" that are committed to pyschiatric care for?
  • Could it be that society is paranoid about those who have exceptional influence [aka power]? Given the notion that power corrupts and seeks to balance the power by enforcing a form of conformity?
  • How would it relate to the Narcissistic personality especially when displayed in extreme forms?
just some of the many...



Care to discuss?
 
Last edited:
The ability to honestly hold something another can not touch ever, or temporarily that puts you in a power of authority.
 
Quantum Quack said:
Wow! A lot of thought behind that... care to elaborate?
Power being linked to exclusivity or monolopy?
Click to expand...

Well if I developed a laser cannon and a moon base I would have "power" over all the world. The true power is the moon base laser cannon, but I am in control of it. That is an example of a power acquired through force, and terrorism. True power is acquired in nature and you are born with it in your mind. An example of this could be a good faith, or scientific finding. My natural (God given) power I have over people is my faith. My faith leads me to be an upstanding individual. I pride myself on being a better man day in day out as part of my faith in God and in the act of being a good man. People smell that on me, and respect me for it.
 
I imagine that if the Earth were to be visited by immensely powerful extraterrestrial beings, we would feel as if we were at their mercy; we would feel threatened by their presence. The perceived imbalance of power would not feel good. :eek:

The same thing might happen with the existence of true artificial intelligence. They would be vastly more superior to us in mental abilities. We would have no choice but to become cyborgs and be assimilated into the collective.
 
The will to power has been debated endlessly, without a definitive understanding of what Nietzsche was really getting at. At times it seems like it was intended to mean a desire or ambition to achieve the power to dominate the world around oneself, but there are plenty of places where that seems clearly to not be the case (especially noting that new people have ever really sought "world-conquest" as a goal, and Nietzsche himself referred to such a drive as a sign of weakness).

I have a theory myself. Nietzsche is eminently fun to read, but I suspect that he himself was never clear on what constituted the will to power, and that he saw it operating in all spheres of human endeavor mostly because he left the concept vague enough to be redefined to fit the situation. The "squishiness" of the concept then leaves the reader free to impose his or her own interpretation, which is in part why so many people find it so fascinating.

Certainly in the strong form—defining is as an ambition to attain power for power's sake or defining "power" to mean the ability to impose one's preferences on others despite their own wishes or objections—I think the concept is a dead end. We don't generally see people behaving in a way that comports with that theory (though there is a subset of narcissists and megalomaniacs that do...and they are more common than we sometimes thing, much as an estimated 3-5% of the population are sopciopathic (or psychopathic)).

In its more subtle forms though, it has a broader applicability and speaks more to the human condition.

That said, as a theory of human behavior, it's naive, as you'd expect from anything that tries to distill human motivations down to bumper sticker size. If you want to understand people, you're better off reading Daniel Kahneman's "Thinking, Fast and Slow" which summarizes the last 50 years of psychological research and what it says about who we are. (It's a book and a line of research that could be tremendously dangerous, since those showing the great interest in it, like advertisers, do not always have our best interests at heart.)
 
The will to Power - What is power?

Perhaps the first question to ask might be 'What is will?'

Then it would follow, to my way of thinking, to wonder what power was of relevance to will.

On January 12th, I found budding pussy willows in the middle of a Yukon winter. Surely not their will to be blooming out of season, so what power has has called them forth premature, only to perish days later when the mercury dropped to -40C?

I brought a few home as evidence and they are now fully emerged.

Pussy-Willows-Jan.-2012.jpg


The will is to continuance, IMO, and the achieving of same by the path of least resistance in the face of considerable competition is the power.


Will and power are so closely aligned that we even have conjoined them in a word that recognizes their potential, as 'willpower'.

Individually and collectively, we learn through our experiences and the manner in which we will and will not use that knowledge is a measure of our power.

My own will is to have sufficient power over my own nature and immediate surrounds, that I can experience life on my own terms, doing no harm to others by intent and hopeful of similar respect in return.

Population density becomes problematical when the will to power of the various individuals inevitably leads to conflicting interest.

Maybe the will to power is more about being free to choose and not having to yield to the will or power of others.

We are each empowered when we can harness our own willful nature.
 
It was once said somewhere in a galaxy far away in the not too distant present :) that for peace to be achieved amongst humans the desire to share resources has to be of a much higher priority than to compete for them.
The will to power in Neitzche's general description is the power to be superior in influence thus leading to a better ability to compete for those resources be they money, women, men, or land etc.
Accordingly this makes man aggressive in his pursuit of power over others [influence] but creates, like the proverbial double edged sword, a state of power inbalance, thus discord, oppression and hositility.
[aka USA evangelism vs Islamic evangelism] yet can provide an illusion of transient and temporary wealth, and happiness for a select few*.
The point being I wonder about is which is more empowering, the power to co-operate or the power to compete?
For surely co-operation leads to greater power of influence [ aka lobby groups, syndication, nationhood, world hood - (United Nations) etc] yet a pseudo individual disempowerment, and individuality or existential power can lead to self deception, arrogance and self delusion in the true nature of the persons power.**
Obvously a balance needs to be struck between the two forms of power : Co-operation [teamwork- sharing] and Existentialism [ individualism - competing]
just thoughts,

* The Global OCCUPY Protest movement may be a good example of this...
** demonstrated by the riots in London recently involving African Britains rising against police for no reason other than to demonstrate police delusions of power. IMO
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14450248
 
Last edited:
posted by Scheherazade:
Maybe the will to power is more about being free to choose and not having to yield to the will or power of others.
Click to expand...
I feel this is very close to a more real form of power than the deluded versions that require the oppression of someone elses power of choice to feather ones own nest so to speak. [ as it is more lasting and achieves higher real value - as it is much harder to achieve this position than the other IMO]
As a horse "whisperer" you would know that the co-operation between man and horse generates a much more significant power than a rider who is in competition with the horse due to a lack of affinity and arrogance. perhaps....
 
A concept or notion springs to mind "co-operation without prejudice" achieves both individual power within a collective through co-operation with out diminishment of veto. [the freedom to withdraw support at any time with out prejudice]
I am sure there would be some fancy Latin saying...as this type of co-operation can be seen being attempted with the United Nations seeking international agreeements with out infinging upon sovereignty issues.
 
Last edited:
power is life over death , in the simplest understanding

in the future , power is life over death

in a more advanced thinking Human , in the future , the bigger picture , Universe, power is survival of Humanity working together as a whole , planet Humanity power
 
Quantum Quack said:
In attempting to understand the notions put forward by F. Nietzsche [1860's] regarding the "will to power" I find that the concept of power is left rather oblique and unexplained in itself and whilst the notion is appealing in itself the idea of "power" and "empowerment" by self and others appears yet to be thrashed out properly. Of course I may be mistaken and no doubt there is much said about exactly "what is power and empowerment".


I was wondering if other forum members had something to contribute to a discussion on "the will to power" as described by Nietzsche, other philosophers of old and Modern psychology/philosophy of today.

Questions I have in mind:
  • Is it simply the power of influence and the desire to achieve more of it?
  • If so the power of influence over what?
  • Is this "will to power" manifested in the socially unacceptable "power of Influence that those suffering "psychosis" that are committed to pyschiatric care for?
  • Could it be that society is paranoid about those who have exceptional influence [aka power]? Given the notion that power corrupts and seeks to balance the power by enforcing a form of conformity?
  • How would it relate to the Narcissistic personality especially when displayed in extreme forms?
just some of the many...

Care to discuss?
Click to expand...


The simple facts of the matter are
1. some people have power
2. "power is powerful," so to speak - power makes a difference
3. power is desirable
4. power comes and goes
5. there is no reliable recipe for how to obtain and keep power


This latter fact - namely, people not being able to make sure they obtain and keep power - is what can keep people awake at night.
 
Quantum Quack said:
I feel this is very close to a more real form of power than the deluded versions that require the oppression of someone elses power of choice to feather ones own nest so to speak. [ as it is more lasting and achieves higher real value - as it is much harder to achieve this position than the other IMO]
As a horse "whisperer" you would know that the co-operation between man and horse generates a much more significant power than a rider who is in competition with the horse due to a lack of affinity and arrogance. perhaps....
Click to expand...

It is a simple fact that while one can intimidate a 1000 lb animal to be biddable to some degree, one shall have a much greater relationship if one builds it upon trust, communication and incentive. The incentive does not have to be a reward for every act of co-operation, merely an occasional reinforcement as a reminder that a positive choice may elicit a reward and that a negative or non response most assuredly will not come with a reward.

Horses, not unlike humans, will play the odds. :)

The ultimate power, IMO, is to have complete power of choice over how to spend one's time.

This is not realizable for most as the needs of our biology occupy most of our time and energy and the rules of society, largely designed to minimize harm, place rules, restrictions, costs and limits upon the pathways we might care to utilize.

The greatest personal loss of power is one which we have personal choice over.

Avoid debt like the plague, especially credit card debt. When you borrow money, you are giving away your personal power.

I know that those who have made a living by playing the odds with money will disagree with the above remark. For every one who gains by transaction (as in the Stock Market, Housing Market etc.) another must lose.

That is where the competitive nature of power comes in. Money offers an incentive to power, and so by co-operative and competitive means, most seek to increase their share of money and the perceived security this offers.

I equate the term 'power' with 'personal choice' and I have no need to impede upon the choices of others until conflicts of interest arise. At that point, communication and mediation will result in a compromise or co-operation, to arrive at a solution that will address at least some of the concerns expressed by the parties involved.

My answer is limited by my personal experience of having been born into a time and place of comparative freedom and opportunity for all, in a country that has never known the devastation of a major armed conflict upon it's soil, and so my perspective will vary greatly from that of others who have endured extreme challenges and lack of personal liberty.

(True power lies in the faculty of knowing how to manage with very few externals, IMO.)
 
scheherazade said:
It is a simple fact that while one can intimidate a 1000 lb animal to be biddable to some degree, one shall have a much greater relationship if one builds it upon trust, communication and incentive. The incentive does not have to be a reward for every act of co-operation, merely an occasional reinforcement as a reminder that a positive choice may elicit a reward and that a negative or non response most assuredly will not come with a reward.
Click to expand...

Do you really believe that?? That a horse will jump over obstacles because of a carrot? Or that a dog will do a trick because of a treat??



I equate the term 'power' with 'personal choice' and I have no need to impede upon the choices of others until conflicts of interest arise. At that point, communication and mediation will result in a compromise or co-operation, to arrive at a solution that will address at least some of the concerns expressed by the parties involved.
Click to expand...

Would you ever get involved in a fist fight?
 
Quantum Quack said:
In attempting to understand the notions put forward by F. Nietzsche [1860's] regarding the "will to power" I find that the concept of power is left rather oblique and unexplained in itself and whilst the notion is appealing in itself the idea of "power" and "empowerment" by self and others appears yet to be thrashed out properly. Of course I may be mistaken and no doubt there is much said about exactly "what is power and empowerment".


I was wondering if other forum members had something to contribute to a discussion on "the will to power" as described by Nietzsche, other philosophers of old and Modern psychology/philosophy of today.

Questions I have in mind:
  • Is it simply the power of influence and the desire to achieve more of it?
  • If so the power of influence over what?
  • Is this "will to power" manifested in the socially unacceptable "power of Influence that those suffering "psychosis" that are committed to pyschiatric care for?
  • Could it be that society is paranoid about those who have exceptional influence [aka power]? Given the notion that power corrupts and seeks to balance the power by enforcing a form of conformity?
  • How would it relate to the Narcissistic personality especially when displayed in extreme forms?
just some of the many...



Care to discuss?[/QUOTE

I think you are right on cue . Group mentality sees it as a mental illness , yet to strive for greatness is an attribute .

I was watching Opra's special on Sean Penn in Haiti and comparing in contrast my own experience since he thinks him and his buddies think they know what the customer wants . I digress.
He hates humans but loves Humanity . Now that is pretty mental if you ask Me . Broader-line anti social behavior . So what comes on next " Ted Turner " and his philosophy of manipulation . He took credit for the iron curtain coming down . He was real proud of that . See I learned it was Reagen and the Pope . Then I learned it was Rock and Roll and now Ted Turner jumps up and says It was I not the other things . You see the Attention Whoring going down . Not much different than a pole dancer who loves her job .
Human behavior.
Will to power . Very interesting and Nietzsche thinking him self in the power roll is also . He joins the ranks of Issac Newton
Click to expand...
 
wynn said:
Do you really believe that?? That a horse will jump over obstacles because of a carrot? Or that a dog will do a trick because of a treat??
Click to expand...

'Trust, communication AND incentive......' The reward, even occasionally, goes a long way toward reinforcing the first two elements. The brain of humans likewise has 'reward centers'.

Would you ever get involved in a fist fight?
Click to expand...

The last physical altercation I was involved in was with my brother when I was age 11. I have managed to avoid such incidents since then.

IFF it should ever be unavoidable that I become engaged in a physical confrontation, it would be my intention to preserve myself from harm by whatever means necessary. :bugeye:
 
scheherazade said:
It is a simple fact that while one can in personal power.

I know that those who have made a living by playing the odds with money will disagree with the above remark. For every one who gains by transaction (as in the Stock Market, Housing Market etc.) another must lose.

ney and the perceived security this offers.

I eq
Click to expand...

We see you have not learned about win win yet my dear . Where both parties benefit from an exchange . Kind of like friends with benefits but with out the orgasms , well a different kind at any rate. Win Win is a Steven Covey principle you might find interesting . Maybe even enlightening.
It benefits both parties . Like a large scale barter system in concept . I eat your tomatoes and you eat my bananas. We both benefit cause I would not have any of you lushes tomatoes if you did not benefit from having what my bananas has to offer. You get potassium from what I hear and I can get the vitamin C from your tomatoes. Win Win . So we both gain in the win win scenario.
The old model of win/ loose is a a thing of the past . It just has not trickled down to the bottom yet . The survivors of this deluge of downward spiral in the market will live by win win . Public perception plays a big roll in market share and swarm behavior. All corporation wants to be swarmed so you can see the motivation to deliver satisfaction to the consumer( swarm )
Win /Win . The will to be fair and equitable will be ripe by the will of the swarm . Public perception plays a big roll in the advertising campaigns of big business . With the awareness of the swarm it will need to be more and more genuine to be of any value .
The ability to hide your attention deficits will fall away as they become more understood by group deification. I mean . They can be grouped and satisfied in block time .
O.K. that is out there .
We all have cravings / Lots of us have the same cravings ? Genuinely satisfy the group cravings. All the people that crave this go over there and get your ya ya and all the people that crave this go over there and get your ya ya .
If you don't get your ya ya and satisfy your craving then the dissatisfaction will cause you to look to the competitor.
All is manipulation in the end and the ability to be genuine rules the day. To admit we live by manipulation would be a big step . To understand how we subordinate each other out of attention deficits would be a bid step also . Satisfaction of the deficits could go along way towards a win /win scenario.
Give people attention and look out . The mob might come and get there attention .Some satisfaction to be had
Leaders in a subordinate roll
There to help any inadequate link in the chain .
The leader helps dig the ditch if the ditch needs more attention so to speak . If the leader is willing then all others in the organization will be willing or more prone to be willing .
Integrity/ Big word / Belief in what you are doing also big / If the crew believes in the mission , support the product and can do so with integrity then all work on manipulating the product to success. The customer is then massaged by the manipulation . Win Win . You feel good and I feel good . Fair exchange of pleasure
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top