Does Power Corrupt or Liberate?

Judaka

We see ourselves through the lens of what we do and can do even if it's not what we'd prefer. Our identity, occupation, relationships and such things are created with heavy influence from factors outside of our control. Humans are logical, this is a fact, even someone evil would hesitate to do evil if he could foresee his regret after he is met with the consequences he knows would come from his actions. Most lack the power to act freely, evil actions can have dire consequences and so malevolence would be self-destructive. Even if the better half of our nature would be sufficient to restrain darker impulses, we won't ever know it. How can those darker impulses be anything but unrealistic fantasies to someone of clear thinking? For someone who knows what grave consequences would await them if they ever stepped over that line? When someone attains power and their unrealistic fantasies become viable options, the choice is changed, it is not a question of self-preservation anymore but of their desire.

Having some power mightn't be enough. To have enough power to be completely free from any kind of threat is rare. Even in a hypothetical situation where one has that kind of power, they may still want to be liked, to maintain relationships, to continue to access certain privileges, and are thus still unwilling to bear the possible consequences of their actions. It is still a calculation, there are other factors to consider than just what goes in one's own head.

Can we really say that humans are essentially good and merely possess the possibility of being tempted by power? That their previously moral nature can sometimes just unravel? I don't think so. We are forced by our circumstances to pick between mutually exclusive desires and power can enable a person to bypass being forced to choose self-preservation against threats they've gained immunity from. You can't see where a bird would fly until you've released it from its cage.

I am interested in what others think about this topic. Provide your own insights.

baker

Having some power mightn't be enough. To have enough power to be completely free from any kind of threat is rare. Even in a hypothetical situation where one has that kind of power, they may still want to be liked, to maintain relationships, to continue to access certain privileges, and are thus still unwilling to bear the possible consequences of their actions. It is still a calculation, there are other factors to consider than just what goes in one's own head.

Can we really say that humans are essentially good and merely possess the possibility of being tempted by power? That their previously moral nature can sometimes just unravel? I don't think so. We are forced by our circumstances to pick between mutually exclusive desires and power can enable a person to bypass being forced to choose self-preservation against threats they've gained immunity from. You can't see where a bird would fly until you've released it from its cage. — Judaka

Attaining a position of power shows what a person is really like. Power doesn't corrupt, it reveals.

Having some power mightn't be enough. To have enough power to be completely free from any kind of threat is rare. — Judaka

The existence of nematodes provides some consolation. Seriously. They are the real rulers of the world. Everyone is subject to them. Imagine, for example, a murderous dictator with some worms in his lungs. He's instantly less frightening.

L'éléphant

You can't see where a bird would fly until you've released it from its cage. — Judaka

Unless it's a crow. This morning I witnessed a crow trying to cross a crosswalk on a wide intersection. A driver trying to make a right turn couldn't wait until the crow was out of the way, so driver went ahead and took his turn. The crow sensing the car coming towards it took to the air and flew the length of that intersection at the height of 3 feet all the way. What a sight! The bird might be thinking, "I'm gonna cross this fucking crosswalk if that makes you unhappy!".

I like sushi

↪Judaka

You need to define what you mean by ‘power’ for any reasonable answer from me ;)

180 Proof

↪Judaka

Coming to power is a costly business: power makes stupid.… — Twilight of the Idols

Tom Storm

Can we really say that humans are essentially good and merely possess the possibility of being tempted by power? — Judaka

Power is a word the meaning of which we do not understand. —Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace

I would never say humans are essentially good, or essentially bad. We seem to be, for the most part, stupid apes. There's no such thing as 'power' per say - this phenomenon is always subject to situational variations. The power of a tribal warlord being quite different to the power of a Prime Minister or a CEO.

Hillary

We seem to be, for the most part, stupid apes. — Tom Storm

Yeah, it's great to be a chimp!

Philosophim

Attaining a position of power shows what a person is really like. Power doesn't corrupt, it reveals. — baker

This. False character only holds when there is threat of punishment, loss, or promise of reward. True character holds when no one will punish, harm, or reward you for what you do.

L'éléphant

↪Judaka

↪baker

↪Philosophim

Ugh. Where to begin.

If you think the way you do here on this thread, then you have no understanding of human nature yet.

Philosophim

↪L'éléphant

Ugh. Where to begin.

If you think the way you do here on this thread, then you have no understanding of human nature yet. — L'éléphant

Care to explain that human nature then? An expression of disapproval is not a point.

Agent Smith

We all have an unexpressed desire to be be special. Despite how the vast majority of royalty is plagued by a poor track record, a young girl's dream is to be a, get this, princess (Disney Princess movies are all the rage I hear).

This is very encouraging in my humble opinion for it then raises the possibility that we could, in a sense, delink the euphoria (good) from the dependence (bad) of drugs (I was informed that power is addictive), figuratively speaking.

Agent Smith

An expression of disapproval is not a point. — Philosophim

:up:

Agent Smith

Ugh. Where to begin.

If you think the way you do here on this thread, then you have no understanding of human nature yet — L'éléphant

:chin:

L'éléphant

An expression of disapproval is not a point. — Philosophim

Neither is this:

False character only holds when there is threat of punishment, loss, or promise of reward. True character holds when no one will punish, harm, or reward you for what you do. — Philosophim

I like sushi

↪Judaka

Seam Carroll’s Mindscape podcast 189 would probably interest you.

Judaka

↪Tom Storm

↪I like sushi

Power means having control and influence, what exactly that entails depends heavily on the context.

We seem to be, for the most part, stupid apes. — Tom Storm

Perhaps you're just making a joke but I think intelligence shouldn't be used as a scapegoat.

Everyone is subject to them. Imagine, for example, a murderous dictator with some worms in his lungs. He's instantly less frightening. — baker

That sounds way more frightening...

MmeGazelle

In the context of a one's position as an individual within a community, in my experience, power over oneself liberates, power over others tends to corrupt.

I like sushi

↪Judaka

It is probably more or less 50-50 then.

I would say that there is a certain threshold where corruption had a tendency to slip in and I would also say that wilfully giving up ‘liberty’ because it is easier is also an opening for corruption to slip in.

Philosophim

An expression of disapproval is not a point.
— Philosophim
Neither is this:

False character only holds when there is threat of punishment, loss, or promise of reward. True character holds when no one will punish, harm, or reward you for what you do.
— Philosophim — L'éléphant

If you wanted me to dig deeper or explain more, just ask. Nothing wrong with that. But we should be better than rolling eyes at one another or just saying, "You're wrong and I can't believe you don't realize how wrong you are."

To myself and likely those that agree with me, character is the core person you are when no one is looking. When I mean core, I don't mean general societal adaptation to different groups of people. I mean values. A way of life you've determined is right and appropriate for yourself, and living by it. You can of course change what you consider right over the course of your life, but what you hold at that time is what you live by.

People who alter their core of who they are in society, or only do particular actions while other people are looking, are weak of character. The point of the action is not because there is belief in any underlying value, but social acceptance and validation, or the avoidance of societal punishment or harm.

People who take actions only for the rewards and punishments society will grant them have weak characters. This is because they compromise the core of who they are for other people. When you gain power, committing a crime can be done easier and with less consequence. As such, if you were only not doing a crime because of the punishment, there is no character to prevent you from doing so. Further, when you obtain power and no longer care about the praise of those underneath you, you no longer treat them in the way you did for your previous reward.

If you find issue with this, can you explain why?

Tom Storm

Perhaps you're just making a joke but I think intelligence shouldn't be used as a scapegoat. — Judaka

Don't see it as a scapegoating (which is the wrong word - I think you mean 'excuse' here), see it as a partial explanation. I don't think people are evil, this is a word I find unhelpful. What is generally the case is people behave according to their capacity and the situation. We are tribal apes and this frequently causes us problems.

L'éléphant

If you find issue with this, can you explain why? — Philosophim

I don't think I can. At least not to you. And I don't mean this in a negative way.

I'll tell this you this, though, then I'll blow off of this thread:

Your "core values", whatever those are, and whatever definition you attach to that expression, wouldn't play a role in a situation in which you find yourself in possession of power and opportunity that you could exploit. (Please keep track of the nuances here). While not all in power would usurp it, when some do, that core values would have nothing to do with it. That's why cybersecurity, surveillance, and monitoring are effective means of combating corruption. They (the people in charge of tracking) would give zero credits to your wholesome goodness.

Tzeentch

Good point by the OP.

Power doesn't corrupt, but simply liberates individuals to a degree that the corrupt parts of their soul can manifest more strongly.

Christoffer

Your "core values", whatever those are, and whatever definition you attach to that expression, wouldn't play a role in a situation in which you find yourself in possession of power and opportunity that you could exploit. (Please keep track of the nuances here). While not all in power would usurp it, when some do, that core values would have nothing to do with it. That's why cybersecurity, surveillance, and monitoring are effective means of combating corruption. They (the people in charge of tracking) would give zero credits to your wholesome goodness. — L'éléphant

Core values are values unknown to most people. Most learn what to think and believe, not necessarily what they truly agree with. Only those with core values that are absolutely essential for their identity won't corrupt them if given power. As you say,

"not all in power would usurp it"

those who wouldn't are defined by their core values, someone expressing it every day, every moment, someone who lives by their values won't abandon them if given power, merely empower those values as they are an integral part of their identity.

The problem for many is that they have no idea what values are actually true to them, or have no concept of how their values are shaped, changed, or connect to themselves. So when given power, they have no guidance for themselves, they only have instincts and emotions driving that power. They have no reason to evolve their values since they didn't have any to begin with. They weaponize the values that were forced upon them or they rebel against them without any substitute.

And the worst of this is once again as you say, "not all would usurp it". The number of people who can handle power when given it is a small minority. This is because self-reflection and being critical of your own morality and values (which helps shape actual core values into existence) isn't common practice in the world. Most people might start doing that late in their life, if at all, and then it's too late.

A child learns how the world works, and how to be an adult, but the adult doesn't know how to fully be "value-independent" before actively choosing to go down that path. And nothing in society values that process as part of the development of a human being. So the only ones who understand their own core values to the point they won't abandon them are the ones who understood it early on or understood to pursue it. Any power to people who never understood this will create emotionally driven people who don't have any guidelines for that power. And most people are like this.

baker

↪Judaka ↪baker ↪Philosophim
Ugh. Where to begin.

If you think the way you do here on this thread, then you have no understanding of human nature yet. — L'éléphant

Oh dear.

But you do?

"Human nature" is an ideological concept, not an empirical one, therefore, any discussion of "human nature" is necessarily going to be ideological. Ie. people making claims without backing them up with empirical evidence.

Does Power Corrupt or Liberate?

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions