![[tmbchr]™](/journal/popocculture-blog-logo.jpg){kind=logo}
Is Knowledge Power?
I’ve been thinking about this question a lot lately from a lot of different angles. But since we’re already talking about conspiracies surrounding the hurricane, this seems like a good avenue of approach for the time being.
I posted some things about thea hurricane conspircy theories which were commented on by the folks at the Noble Realms forums. And though I don’t agree with all the points of view, there were some interesting points of conversation brought up.
In reference to the conspiratorial possibility that some shadow government can control the weather, I asked the question of what’s the point of knowing that. I asked, “How does knowing that or thinking that help you or me or anybody effected by such things?”
A commenter by the name of Xenopope responded to that item thusly:
Knowledge is power. Knowing and accepting the reality is the first step in doing anything about it. Until you begin to think on the levels of those in control, you won’t reach your full potential in combating it.
I know everybody always says knowledge is power, but is it really? Or is that something which we hear and see repeated often enough that we just accept it uncritically? I’m not sure myself, which is why I’m asking the question.
Off the top of my head I can think of several situations where knowledge doesn’t give you much power at all:
- You overhear your boss telling another high-level manager that you or your friend is about to be laid off. You’ve got knowledge, but how does that knowledge help you or your friend? Aren’t you powerless to change the pending layoff?
- You accidentally discover that your husband or wife is cheating on you with somebody else. Now that you have that knowledge, what power does that give you?
In both cases, the way I see it is that it doesn’t give you any power. It actually reinforces the other person’s position of power because they are acting and you are reacting. In some ways, I wonder if that’s a useful definition of how power relationships work: the person who acts has power, the person who reacts has less power (unless they force the other person to react - but then you become the actor, so the definition still holds up). Back to these hypothetical social examples though, while this knowledge doesn’t give you power (you’re simply reacting), it does put you into a position where you can stand up and take an action of your own. You can quit your job before they fire you (why, though, especially since if you get fired you’ll get a severance package). Or you can confront your spouse about the affair, or you can simply leave the relationship. Whether those puts you into positions of power though seems arguable. But I thought I’d get the ball rolling on the conversation.
Going back to Xenopope’s comments though, they claimed that knowing and accepting reality is the first step towards action. Well, isn’t taking action the first step of action? Why do you need to know or accept things to take action? Oftentimes when you take action you create realities which other people then have to know and accept. It sounds like loser-talk to me.
What do you guys think? Is knowledge really power? Or is knowledge what those without power cling to in order to comfort themselves for their lack of power? Is this just a case of the hypothetical guy who never gets laid saying that he doesn’t get laid because he simply doesn’t want to? If knowledge is power or if it isn’t, how does that affect the nature of power itself? What is power? How do we know when we have it and when we don’t? How do we go from not having it to having it?
- The Art of Knowledge
- This quote kicks ass
- For a good time
- The Cloud of Unknowing
- An Apple for the Teacher
- Prev: Domain Masking Questions
- Next: Stopping to Philosophize
September 2nd, 2005 at 8:07 pm
Two nice compact definitions of power from Wikipedia:
Power in physics is “the amount of work done per unit of time.”
Power in sociology is “the more or less unilateral ability (real or perceived) or potential to bring about significant change, usually in people’s lives, through the actions of oneself or of others.”
I think this whole idea of work or change is really important to this discussion. And I also think the distinction between real and perceived power is a really interesting one.
September 2nd, 2005 at 8:25 pm
Good point. Maybe so! But is this inferring that the hypothetical guy would be lying about not wanting to get laid to try to save face? Because maybe he really dosen’t want to get laid because he knows he can and has moved past his fascination with it . . .
September 2nd, 2005 at 8:33 pm
I agree, and I’m glad you came here to continue the conversation (as I don’t much care for writing on forums, myself).
It’s a more complex issue in relation to the guy wanting to get “laid” but that’s why I threw it in as a barb. I can argue in both directions successfully from experience…
In any event, what I’m after isn’t so much the thing about getting laid or not getting laid but what function knowledge serves in the game of power.
PS. My name is spelled Boucher. Oh, also, whatever those [quote] quicktag things are don’t work on my site. I do have a blockquote button above the comment area, but I’m told they don’t appear in (I think) Mac based browsers. Straight HTML does work though, FYI.
September 2nd, 2005 at 9:03 pm
Well, if I knew my friend was gonna be fired, I’d tell him to start short-timing. At least he could goof around at work for a while and make the best of it, or start looking for another job (depending on the timeframe).
If I knew my wife was cheating, I’d start moving my money out of joint accounts. Then I’d get divorced so I could start having sex with multiple women ASAP.
September 2nd, 2005 at 9:04 pm
Yeah, but are any of those options really power?
September 2nd, 2005 at 9:35 pm
Last night at a rehearsal, I used the phrase “language is power” and my guitarist misheard me. He replied, “Yes, knowledge IS power.”
I didn’t bother correcting him, because it seemed at the time that he disproved my point about language. But really, it was an example of miscommunication, which actually SUPPORTS my theory on language as empowerment. Maybe I should’ve corrected him after all. Then he would’ve gotten my point clealry. But that’s besides the point.
Remember the G.I. Joe cartoons of the ’80’s? There was a PSA at the end of every episode, and the slogan was: “Knowing is half the battle”…
That’s how I feel about knowledge: it’s half the battle. It’s not enough to know things… applications of knowledge must be made.
Going back to music for a second: I know plenty of guys who are still busy building their dream studios, but haven’t recorded one single note. Why? Because they are still accumulating the latest gadgets for their studio. But if it never gets used, what good is all the recording equipment in the world?
September 3rd, 2005 at 1:58 am
Knowledge is knowledge. It might give the illusion of power, and that helps us reassure ourselves that we can have some sort of control, even if we don’t. If you caught your wife cheating, you could move your money around & file for divorce but you can’t change that she was cheating.
September 3rd, 2005 at 8:42 am
knowledge is entirely seperate from power. the only way they come together is by the will. i know some extremely well educated people who are socially inept and are unable to bring effort to social in thier own lives. power is a will to effort, which has a different motivational structure as the will to knowledge.
in our society we have an education industry that promotes and perpetuates the myth that knowledge is power. there are many mbas and history phds driving cabs who will begrudgingly attest to that. a graduate has to take his/her piece of paper and drive it around, learning to market the skills contained within the knowledge so that they can add value and contribute to society.
in many ways the university is like the priesthood, a sanctuary away from the harsh realities of the day to day struggle of the wage slave. the tenured professor lives in a cloistered academic retreat, kept by the state in an artificial environment “proving” that knowledge is power. in some ways the professor is similar to the priest or guru, a person af great knowledge, giving the appearance of power.
the truly powerful are kings, queens, presidents, prime ministers and dictators of various stripes. these people tend to be revered and at the same time hated. they don`t tend to be vastly knowledgeable.
in fact we want to see george bush as stupid.
there are those of knowledge who build mechanisms of power by building political power bases through fiefdoms. departments in companies, in political parties and governments have these environments where the currency is association to the manderins at the top. the department heads. these people have the power over the lives and livelyhoods of those they are entrusted to manage. this is the land of macciavelli. this is where the hearts of good men and women are torn from thier chests in ritual fashion while they try to get things done. the aim here isn`t productivity so much as protecting the power base. anything that threatens this is destroyed.
the technocracy trys to make knowledge into power. it is always failing but there are always new players joining the game.
September 3rd, 2005 at 9:13 am
been a lurker here for a bit since i became aware of this site from the dail grail. its now one my fav sites - soem many great questions and discussions! regarding this topic… james’ comment above touched on a point that I was going to elaborate on… perhaps it is more accurate to say ‘knowledge is empowering‘ as opposed to simply equating it with power alone. as we accumulate knowledge it simply gives us a broader field of information from which may choose to act… or not… given our ‘knowledge base’. sure you may ‘know’ something… like your going to be laid off… but now what are you going to do about it? is ignorance really bliss? only if you are fearful, IMO…
September 4th, 2005 at 4:41 pm
Perception and action together create power. Knowledge can be useful way to work those two things most effectively, then–that’s the position I’m going with. Sure, you can’t change that your wife cheated on you, you don’t have “power” to change that that happened. But! Does she have power over you or more power than you simply by the fact of having cheated or by you knowing that she cheated? Only if you’re apt to percieve yourself as a cuckold or a loser or a victim and then feel all hurt and bothered to an extent that those feelings will prevent you from moving on with your life and doing the shit you need to do for you. But knowing you can’t do anything about the cheating, but also knowing this opens up opportunities for you (can you now negotiate an open marriage? Or, as suggested above, can you now allow yourself to loosen your emotional attachment to her, transfer your skrill to your own separate accounts, use the proof of infidelity to gain a divorce where you don’t bear the brunt of the financial weight of things through alimony and the like?, can you now get your fuck on with abandon (if you’re into that) or more effectively use your time to build your business, write that hit record, meditate on the void–shit that you’d have less time for were you to stay in the marriage? Well, shit, that sounds like power, or at least empowerment (what’s the distinction between those two words? anyone?) to me. Knowledge allowing me to choose to shift perception, take action and glory in having taken that action. Maybe it works out, maybe it doesn’t. But I feel this is in the direction of power at the least.
September 4th, 2005 at 10:49 pm
So, knowlege is sorrow. Knowledge is power. Therefore, sorrow is power.
Maybe the guys over at Rigorous Intuition are correct, with their satanic rituals of the powerful theories.
http://rigorousintuition.blogspot.com/