In a recent episode of Stefan Molyneux's show (which I love), a particular statement caught my attention and sparked some thoughts. Stef claimed that 'philosophy is not about power' and 'power over others is bad'.
Taking power to mean only “control over others” is a problematic oversimplification that limits our ability to discuss and understand the concept of power in its entirety.
Beyond ethics
Stef frequently discusses topics that are fundamentally about power, even if he avoids using the term explicitly.
His development of a universal rational empirical ethics theory is, at its core, an exploration of power - specifically, what constitutes permissible and non-permissible uses of power. This is, after all, the essence of ethics.
Moreover, Stef often provides advice on non-ethical matters, such as personal health and lifestyle choices. He advocates for proper diet, exercise, and self-care, despite these not being ethical violations in the strict sense. This reveals an inconsistency in his approach, as he's essentially advising on personal power without acknowledging it as such.
Funny off-topic: I've noticed a verbal tic in Stef's speech when he feels put on the spot: the frequent use of the word 'right' at the end of sentences, almost as if seeking reassurance from his audience. This habit seems to surface when he's on shaky theoretical ground.
The absence of a word
The avoidance of the term 'power' in philosophical discourse is akin to trying to develop a theory of gravity without using the word 'gravity'. It's an impossible task. The negative connotation associated with power - equating it solely with corruption or control over others - is limiting our ability to have meaningful discussions about it.
Imagine trying to teach someone how to travel efficiently from point A to point B: you'd talk about gears, pistons, wheels, and so on, without ever naming the whole — without ever mentioning a car! This is essentially what happens when we try to discuss power without using the term.
Say “power” and they hear “abuse of power”
This linguistic shift, where 'power' has become synonymous with 'political power', is a fascinating phenomenon. It's as if the word 'car' had been replaced entirely by 'taxi' in our language. This replacement of a broader category (power) with one of its subcategories (political power) has significant implications for how we think and talk about power in general.
Taking it back
As I continue to develop and eventually publicize my theories on power, I anticipate resistance due to this widespread negative association with the term.
However, it's crucial that we reclaim the broader meaning of power and recognize its importance in philosophical discourse.
Ethics + Aesthetics
Only then can we develop a true unified philosophical theory: aesthetics (how to attain power and virtue) and ethics (how to avoid avoid vice and the abuse of power).
How did it get to this?
Language is a living entity, constantly evolving and adapting to the needs and perceptions of its users.
One fascinating aspect of this evolution is the phenomenon known as semantic shift, where words change their meaning over time. This is what happend with the transformation of the word 'power'.
Historically, 'power' encompassed a broad spectrum of meanings, including various forms of influence, ability, and control. However, a notable semantic shift has occurred, narrowing its interpretation primarily to political power or power over others. This change can be classified as both a narrowing of the term and a pejorativization, as it has taken on negative connotations for certain groups, such as libertarians and followers of thinkers like Stefan Molyneux.
A Semantic shift
This shift in meaning raises questions about its origins and implications. Could it be the result of a process described by behavioral scientists like B.F. Skinner and popularized by pop science starts like Rory Sutherland?
The idea that environment shapes behavior, which in turn influences thinking, might explain how societal structures and historical power dynamics have gradually altered our perception of the term 'power'.
Throughout human history, hierarchical structures and the exercise of authority over others have been prevalent. This pervasive experience of power dynamics may have ingrained certain associations with the concept of power.
The Enlightenment and the spread of Christianity introduced egalitarian ideals, challenging traditional power structures. However, these ideals were often co-opted or distorted by existing authorities, complicating our relationship with power.
The illusion of choice
The evolution of governance systems, from divine right monarchies to representative democracies, has further shaped our understanding of power. While the ability to elect leaders might seem like progress, it introduces the concept of 'placebo choice' - the illusion of having a meaningful say in who holds power. This illusion may serve to pacify populations while maintaining existing power structures.
Paranoid temptations
Some observers, like independent journalist Tim Pool, have suggested that recent social movements like Occupy Wall Street prompted a deliberate effort by elites to redirect public discontent. The ancient strategy of 'divide and conquer' may be at play, turning different segments of society against each other to prevent unified challenges to existing power structures.
Qui prodest?
The semantic shift of 'power' to a predominantly negative concept could be seen as serving the interests of those who already hold power. By framing power as something undesirable or corrupting, it discourages people from seeking it, potentially preserving the status quo.
To add insult to injury: the irony of political leaders being called 'public servants' while wielding significant authority over citizens further illustrates the complex relationship between language, perception, and power dynamics in our society.
Taking back control
As language and society evolve, it’s crucial we stay aware of how different influences shape our understanding of key ideas.
We need to shape our environment, for we are shaped by it.
If environment can change the meaning of essential words like “power” in the minds of entire cultures, then nothing is more important than taking control of our environment, to take back control of our own behavior and minds.