Power between the Noble Man and the Slave - Essay Example

Name : xxxxxxxxxxx Institution : xxxxxxxxxxx Course : xxxxxxxxxxx Title : Power between the Noble man and the slave Tutor : xxxxxxxxxxx @2010 Introduction Power is the evaluation of the ability of an entity to control the environment which surrounds itself, together with the behaviors of the other entities. Most of the people perceive power as being evil or injustice but it is accepted as endemic to humans or other social beings like animals as it gives authority and a guideline of how they are supposed to relate each other in the society (Hogan, 2000). In some cases, power is seen to resemble influence whereby it is expected to have different influence to the nobleman and a slave. There are many philosophers who are behind various theories concerning the nature of power. They have classified it into different types so as to highlight the various aspects that influence it. These types are: ownership, position, knowledge or skills, access control, obligation, trust and self-determination (Graham 2001). How is power conceived differently between the nobleman and the slave? Although power is expected to have common impacts to the whole group that it is aimed to govern, it is conceived differently by various individuals depending on the level of standard of living which also brings about the type of power that one has; a nobleman has different powers compared to a slave. This is due to the availability of the above mentioned factors which acts as enhancements to the entitled power and also seen as classification of powers. For instance, the French and Raven are the thinkers responsible for the theory of these different types of powers (Copleston 2003). The economic or the social class of an individual can determine the type of power that one has or that which one can be entitled. People obey the rules regarding the position of the individual implementing it but not his personalities. Some formal positions may have powers invested in them by the company or governing authority and other informal powers may be acquired through well pronounced positions such social leaders or team roles like the head of department. This type of power is known as position power and it is practiced by the nobleman over their slaves. The position of the slaves does not have any power to decide or choose anything which concerns their relationship with the boss (Russell & Brittan 2004). There is another type of power which comes along with the ownership of the properties. When one owns something, he or she has the freedom or is entitled all the authority to choose what to do with it. A nobleman owns properties which he assign a slave to care for, thus not unless with the authority from the owner cannot make any decision concerning the property under his care (Foucault et al, 2003). Philosophers also state that knowledge is power. They argue that if one knows something he or she can use it to his or her advantage. This can go along with the skills or the capability of doing something rather than just having the idea of doing it. These can either be technical power of academics and experts who knows how things functions or social knowledge about things concerning people and their activities like business. However, this power depends on the demand and supply of the services, for example, if one’s knowledge is not recognized it has little power but if something extraordinary happens which only this knowledge can solve gives him or her power to ask for anything. The thinkers look at the obligation power as one which is internal or controlled by the conscience. This may be the powers of responsibility like in a parent, rules which one is used to and takes then as habits or a revenge of a favor that one received from a friend. The nobleman has the obligation power which guides him to realize and carry on his responsibility as the boss while the slaves are able to attend to the assigned duties (Graham et al, 2001). Trust may also result to some power, for example, the trust that a child has over the parents gives the power to ask for things and the management trusts the workers so as to have the power to assign them the duties. Thus the nobleman is able to trust his slaves so as to have the powers to pass them responsibilities. The self determination power enables a person to decide what to say and do; however, it is only applied by the nobleman because he has the authority to choose what is best for him. The slave depends on the instructions given by their bosses and even if they make decisions they choose those that best suit the interests of their seniors (Hogan 2000). Michael Foucault’s is the most famous thinker about power in the 20th century continental philosophy although Martin Heidegger is also well known because of their writings on the power and uses. Foucault’s concern of power is for the purposes of epistemological reasons and that of Heidegger is of metaphysics (Foucault et al, 2003). There are other philosophers who specialize on social-political powers and these are differently conceived by the noble people and the slaves. For example, Arendt and some others are responsible for the social-political theories and Levinas is responsible for the ethics. (Graham 2001). Friedrich Nietzsche is a philosopher who works on the morality of master-slave. He argues that morality exists in two types: there is a master morality which develops from his nobility and a slave one which builds up inside the weak man. These types are completely different. Master morality is that which is strong willed it fits in the scale of good or bad and to them being good is being noble while bad is the weak, coward and dependent people. This type of morality begins with the strong side and then the weak side comes. This is because he has the power to be honored and his first attention is captured by things which are value-creating (Copleston, 2003). Slave morality starts with dislike attitude which then turns to creativity and results to values. The philosopher argued that the slaves should be cunning and intelligent to attain their rebellion. In his book "Genealogy of Morals" he states that "Human history would be a much too stupid affair were it not for the intelligence introduced by the powerless". Nietzsche used the term resentment to express the feeling of dislike, unhealthy and hatred of those who fared well in life. The slave considers the qualities of power, strength and wealth as being evil in an act of revenging against those who had them in plenty. Therefore this kind of morality is an intransigent one because good does not develop from personality but from the denial of the values of those in power. A person who is noble considers goodness first and decides what is bad afterward while the slaves conceive the evil first and the fashion of the opposite later (Geuss, 2008). Nietzsche emphasizes not only on the man but the type of man that exists because he does not accept the idea that there is a definite or stable category of man that exists. That is why he defines the kind of men by their powers or by showing their gradations and a variation, the interests is only on the best. According to him to elevate human species is to create the rare or exceptional persons through the use of the rule of the best. He does this so as to have an aristocratic society with the required order of ranks and the motivation for excellence. This type of society does not only look into social categories but emphasizes more on the nobility of mind and the great deeds. It is classified by: diversity of worth among the people in it, a long scale of gradations of ranks and existence of slavery or subordination in one form or the other. These factors outline the validity of power among the individuals as each class is entitled some powers. The aristocratic men keep down the subordinates for their own heightening (Geuss 2008). According to Nietzsche even the most powerful men can belong to the category of the slaves if they do not have the freedom of mind or lack the knowledge to utilize their powers. People are entitled powers depending on the rank they fall in, for example, there those who are prominent in the political field and are assumed to have power to rule over others. However they are ranked into different levels such that there are those who are ranked at the top of the others and granted some powers to rule over them. For example, the president has the powers over any one else in politics, all the others are his subordinates although he has granted powers to some over others (Copleston, 2003). Other fields like religion also have the power ranks. From the beginning God is assumed to have power over all but at the ground level people like the clergy men have the religious powers over their members of congregation. The power of God is shown by the author of the book of Genesis. Initially, Adam and Eve were treated like children but after they ate the fruit from the tree which God had forbidden them, they were able to distinguish between good and evil. Although by eating the fruit they were being naughty the consequences is that they acquired the knowledge of good and evil hence God instilled some powers in them and they could choose what was best for them and what was not. This was the beginning of the freedom of powers manifested by God upon men. Many of the moral philosophers in this field reasons hitherto: they assume that there is different between good and evil in the life, life possesses moral importance and there is a moral order in the world. Nietzsche also argues that the word good translated in different languages still has its original meaning of the noble in the aristocratic society while bad originally meant plebeian or low ranked in the social class (Hogan 2000). The idea of Thrasymachus in his writing, The Republic, that justice is nothing else but the interest of the stronger, is similar to that of Nietzsche when applied to the context of good and bad. According to him, the interests of the stronger determines whether something is good or bad and because they have the power to influence or convince those in low ranks, it becomes accepted that the thing is good or bad. They consider the above discussed types of powers from the theory of French and Raven, to determine the powers that people have. For example, people can be strengthened by the quality and quantity of the properties that they have, their positions in the society or the trust people have on them and so on (Russell & Brittan, 2004). The power of influencing others also depends on the above factors. For example, if one is a political or a social leader, his subordinates are supposed to respect and honor his ideas hence can easily influence them. Those with valuable possessions can easily dictate what their servants should do because they depend on them and they have the power of money. Steven Lukes, a philosopher in this field looks at the three dimensions of power. He argues that power can be seen as a range of forms of restrictions on the action of human beings and also as that which enhances the actions although in a partial scope. Other philosophers like Michael Foucault 1926-1984 of French and an Italian philosopher Niccolo Machiavelli of 1469 to 1527 also follows the idea of Lukes and sees power as a complicated strategic situation in a given society or in a social setting( Hogan 2000). The two powers holding different ranks of people in a society are: the primary power which is the direct and personal use of force coercion and the secondary power entail the threat of constraints of force or social. JK Galbraith gives a summary of the various types of powers as being condign or that which is based on force, Compensatory, that which comes through the use of various resources or conditioned which is as a result of persuasion. They also portrayed various sources of these powers to be: individuals, their properties or material resources and the organizational set up, that is whoever should have the executive powers of an organization. The noble people will always have the graeter power because they possess greater properties, have confidence in themselves and are mostly assigned the most executive positions in organizations but the slaves will always depend on them( Copleston 2003). Thomas Hobbies explains power to be a man’s present means to obtain future apparent goods. That is the ability of the mind of an individual to plan for the betterment of the future. The rational choice theory by Keith Dowding, explains that human beings can be modeled as actors who choose from a variety of choices set the most possible actions in order to achieve the planned outcomes. In it both the outcome and the social powers have to be involved. Outcome power is the capability of an individual to bring about the desired outcome while the social power is the capability of a person to change the structures of the initiative of the actors so as to bring about outcomes (Graham et al, 2001). The above framework can be used to model a wide range of social interactions where the concerns have the capability to exert power over others. For example, a noble person may take options from other choices set and change their relative costs or might change believe of others about the incentive structures. Philosophers discuss power and its relevance in the society. They all agree that power is everywhere because it comes from everywhere and depends on the ability of the individual to think or utilize his skills to implement the power he or she possesses. All what power entails is discipline and punishment but the leading one is intention or how to exercise it (Geuss 2008). Conclusion From the beginning power was there and is still there. For life to continue there has to be people of different ranks. People are different with variety of abilities which gives them different powers. According to the philosophers, there are different kinds of powers based on the various factors of life. This aspect distinguishes the slave from a nobleman because they have different powers entitled or conceived to them. The nobleman has more powers compared to the subordinate because the factors which determine the power entitled are rare to a slave than a noble person. These factors are: social or the political position of an individual or the ownership of the properties. The noble people have more powers compared to the slaves because most of them are given the prominent positions in organizations or owns the most valuable properties which they assign the slaves to take care of thus they have the ability to dictate to their juniors on what to do. The amount of power one has depends on the ability to use the authority that one has and the skills that one has (Geuss 2008 Bibliography Foucault M., Bertani M., Fontana A., Ewald F. & Macey D., 2003, "Society must be defended": lectures at the Collège de France, Picador, New York. Graham, F, etal, 2001, Political philosophy and cultural renewal: collected essays, Transaction Publishers, Piscataway. Geuss R., 2008, Philosophy and real politics, Princeton University Press, Princeton. Copleston F., 2003, A history of philosophy, Continuum International Publishing Group, United Kingdom. Russell B. & Brittan S., 2004, Power: a new social analysis, Routledge, Routledge. Hogan L., 2000, Power, W.W. Norton, Virago. Read More

The thinkers look at the obligation power as one which is internal or controlled by the conscience. This may be the powers of responsibility like in a parent, rules which one is used to and takes then as habits or a revenge of a favor that one received from a friend. The nobleman has the obligation power which guides him to realize and carry on his responsibility as the boss while the slaves are able to attend to the assigned duties (Graham et al, 2001). Trust may also result to some power, for example, the trust that a child has over the parents gives the power to ask for things and the management trusts the workers so as to have the power to assign them the duties.

Thus the nobleman is able to trust his slaves so as to have the powers to pass them responsibilities. The self determination power enables a person to decide what to say and do; however, it is only applied by the nobleman because he has the authority to choose what is best for him. The slave depends on the instructions given by their bosses and even if they make decisions they choose those that best suit the interests of their seniors (Hogan 2000). Michael Foucault’s is the most famous thinker about power in the 20th century continental philosophy although Martin Heidegger is also well known because of their writings on the power and uses.

Foucault’s concern of power is for the purposes of epistemological reasons and that of Heidegger is of metaphysics (Foucault et al, 2003). There are other philosophers who specialize on social-political powers and these are differently conceived by the noble people and the slaves. For example, Arendt and some others are responsible for the social-political theories and Levinas is responsible for the ethics. (Graham 2001). Friedrich Nietzsche is a philosopher who works on the morality of master-slave.

He argues that morality exists in two types: there is a master morality which develops from his nobility and a slave one which builds up inside the weak man. These types are completely different. Master morality is that which is strong willed it fits in the scale of good or bad and to them being good is being noble while bad is the weak, coward and dependent people. This type of morality begins with the strong side and then the weak side comes. This is because he has the power to be honored and his first attention is captured by things which are value-creating (Copleston, 2003).

Slave morality starts with dislike attitude which then turns to creativity and results to values. The philosopher argued that the slaves should be cunning and intelligent to attain their rebellion. In his book "Genealogy of Morals" he states that "Human history would be a much too stupid affair were it not for the intelligence introduced by the powerless". Nietzsche used the term resentment to express the feeling of dislike, unhealthy and hatred of those who fared well in life.

The slave considers the qualities of power, strength and wealth as being evil in an act of revenging against those who had them in plenty. Therefore this kind of morality is an intransigent one because good does not develop from personality but from the denial of the values of those in power. A person who is noble considers goodness first and decides what is bad afterward while the slaves conceive the evil first and the fashion of the opposite later (Geuss, 2008). Nietzsche emphasizes not only on the man but the type of man that exists because he does not accept the idea that there is a definite or stable category of man that exists.

That is why he defines the kind of men by their powers or by showing their gradations and a variation, the interests is only on the best. According to him to elevate human species is to create the rare or exceptional persons through the use of the rule of the best. He does this so as to have an aristocratic society with the required order of ranks and the motivation for excellence. This type of society does not only look into social categories but emphasizes more on the nobility of mind and the great deeds.

Read More