THE SELF-REINFORCING NATURE OF SOCIAL HIERARCHY: ORIGINS AND CONSEQUENCES OF POWER ..

[nihilistcat]

http://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?...pdf&TYPE=2

The above is a link to an article that discusses power theory. In general, I think Nietzsche's analysis of power is pretty simplistic, almost as if he's legitimizing power based relationships (whether personal or institutional) as opposed to offering any real insight into its origins (besides just presuming our "will to power" is a natural attribute of human nature, without any substantive elaboration or for that matter any real reasoning behind his assumption, besides I suppose his reading of history or anecdotal observations).

I think power is much more complicated, and it seems to arise under duress (rather than ideal conditions). It can be spurred by rejection (suggesting that a desire for power may be linked to our desire for social acceptance), it can be spurred by desperate circumstances or scarcity, etc., but it's rarely spurred under conditions of peace and abundance, or under an inclusive/egalitarian social system that solicits universal participation.

In fairness, these observations on my part are no less anecdotal than Nietzsche's observations, but they do at least attempt to get at the origins of power, whereas Nietzsche seems to accept our lust for power as a foregone conclusion, and in an almost religious fashion, proclaims it as an innate feature of human nature with no further exploration or insight or study (which IMO is pretty stunning for a thinker who get's so much fanfare in philosophical circles).

[popsthebuilder]

Nice.

[bennyboy]

All caps = asshole

/thread

[nihilistcat]

All caps = asshole

/thread

Someone who whines about all caps = anal retentive creepy freak in moms basement with tinfoil propeller hat on overdrive

And by the way, it was all caps in the paper (I just copied and pasted).

[bennyboy]

All caps = asshole

/thread

Someone who whines about all caps = anal retentive creepy freak in moms basement with tinfoil propeller hat on overdrive

And by the way, it was all caps in the paper (I just copied and pasted).

Nah.  All-caps is known to be the text equivalent of shouting, used when one wants to magnify the importance of one's ideas (or thread) over others.  10 seconds of typing, or 1 second to realize that the link you gave had a non-caps title, could have saved you from being told you're being rude.

Carry on.

[Jackalope]

Someone who whines about all caps = anal retentive creepy freak in moms basement with tinfoil propeller hat on overdrive

No.

And by the way, it was all caps in the paper (I just copied and pasted).

Mod hat on: Don't do that. Summarize/excerpt and link to the the original material. Copypasta without commentary or in it's entirety is frowned upon.

[Cato]

In fairness, these observations on my part are no less anecdotal than Nietzsche's observations, but they do at least attempt to get at the origins of power, whereas Nietzsche seems to accept our lust for power as a foregone conclusion, and in an almost religious fashion, proclaims it as an innate feature of human nature with no further exploration or insight or study (which IMO is pretty stunning for a thinker who get's so much fanfare in philosophical circles).

Did you honestly think everybody would take your link at face value without looking? The content of the linked paper has very little to do with the point you're making.

Nietzsche has the entire experiment of recorded human history to make conclusions regarding lust for power. What better experiment do you have to conclude differently? Certainly not that paper you linked. Those management academicians certainly haven't conducted any experiments or study other than referencing others' work. What was your criticism of Nietzsche again?

Here's the CV of one of the authors of the study you linked to:
http://wagner.nyu.edu/files/faculty/cv/j...e-cv_2.pdf

I want to know what you find in this that is superior to Nietzsche. Joe Magee has no practical experience, none. Since graduating he has worked in NYU's graduate school of public service. Graduate school of public service. Graduate school of public service. Graduate school of public service. Let this sink in a moment. Here you have a person that has never held a non-academic position in his life teaching other inexperienced people what it is to allocate taxes (public resources) for the sake of a cushy elected public office (public service). A fucking graduate degree!!!!

There's so much wrong with this; I'll just stop for now.

[nihilistcat]

In fairness, these observations on my part are no less anecdotal than Nietzsche's observations, but they do at least attempt to get at the origins of power, whereas Nietzsche seems to accept our lust for power as a foregone conclusion, and in an almost religious fashion, proclaims it as an innate feature of human nature with no further exploration or insight or study (which IMO is pretty stunning for a thinker who get's so much fanfare in philosophical circles).

Did you honestly think everybody would take your link at face value without looking? The content of the linked paper has very little to do with the point you're making.

Nietzsche has the entire experiment of recorded human history to make conclusions regarding lust for power. What better experiment do you have to conclude differently? Certainly not that paper you linked. Those management academicians certainly haven't conducted any experiments or study other than referencing others' work. What was your criticism of Nietzsche again?

Here's the CV of one of the authors of the study you linked to:
http://wagner.nyu.edu/files/faculty/cv/j...e-cv_2.pdf

I want to know what you find in this that is superior to Nietzsche. Joe Magee has no practical experience, none. Since graduating he has worked in NYU's graduate school of public service. Graduate school of public service. Graduate school of public service. Graduate school of public service. Let this sink in a moment. Here you have a person that has never held a non-academic position in his life teaching other inexperienced people what it is to allocate taxes (public resources) for the sake of a cushy elected public office (public service). A fucking graduate degree!!!!

There's so much wrong with this; I'll just stop for now.

The paper was to simply provide one resource to facilitate a discussion of power theory (and I think Magee does an okay job, but unfortunately the best work on this topic isn't freely available, so I didn't have the luxury of cherry picking from the best scholars). I raised Nietzsches' views because he is perhaps the most prominent philosopher to grapple with the nature of power.

I've read plenty of Nietzsche, in most cases I love his work (and especially his skill as a writer), and I don't even dispute his contention that men are driven by power lust. However, Nietzsche treats power as a basal instinct, whereas in my view, power lust is likely caused by other deeper factors.

What I'm interested in is exploring those deeper factors. But it is also interesting that you chose to discuss via ad hominen (and that seems to be the posture of the only other poster in this thread as well). Is this threatening a deeply held belief on your part? Would it shatter your worldview to discover that Nietzsche wasn't right about everything or didn't penetrate deep enough on every issue?

With all due respect ... I think that's a pretty shitty way to have a conversation?

[bennyboy]

What I'm interested in is exploring those deeper factors. But it is also interesting that you chose to discuss via ad hominen (and that seems to be the posture of the only other poster in this thread as well).

Calling someone rude isn't an ad hominem argument-- that word is reserved for discrediting an argument by attacking the person. But if ANYONE uses ALL CAPS I will CALL them RUDE because IT'S annoyING.

I haven't actually seen enough information or a strong enough argument in this thread in order to respond. Here's what I've seen so far:

*random paper* "Nietzsche is legitimizing power relationships, instead of explaining them. But I think power is much more complicated than that. Nietzsche's arguments and mine are both anecdotal, but at least mine have some value."

If you want to say something about either Nietzsche or your own views, you're going to have to do better than a couple one liners. Show some background-- what, exactly did Nietzsche say about power? Why do you disagree with it? Why, exactly, is your view better than his?

[nihilistcat]

I'll accept the critique that I copied and pasted without elaborating on the paper itself, and okay fine, large caps are ordinarily considered to be shouting, and I shouldn't have been lazy ...

Okay I've scolded myself