Power and Dominance

Hi everybody. I've been thinking about this lately, and I'd love to hear some other thoughts on this subject.

Is there a direct relationship between Power and Dominance? If I were to define the terms, in order to facilitate discussion and my perspective, I would say that Power = the ability to influence... and Dominance = the act of oppressing.

Do people who have Power also have Dominance over others? Or, does the act of Dominating create Power? Can Power and Dominance be independent?

What I mean to say is, can I be Powerful without putting others down in my wake? Or, could I use Power (ability to influence) to lift others up and still maintain my same influential sphere with people.

Whenever I come out and use my influence, I always feel as though I am subjugating others. When I achieve my goals, such as getting a role in a show, or getting a good grade in a class (as such being elected to Class Leader), I am forcing others to be subjugated to me. When I help others, they suddenly become "less" than me somehow in my perception. I also have an instinct that it does NOT have to be this way.

Thoughts from Sith, Jedi, and Shadows are all encouraged because I think different viewpoints may be able to see this in a way I do not.

Thanks,
C.

- XXXIII -

Knowing others is intelligence;
knowing yourself is true wisdom.
Mastering others is strength;
mastering yourself is true power. If you realise that you have enough,
you are truly rich.
If you stay in the centre
and embrace death with your whole heart,
you will endure forever.

- LXVI -

All streams flow to the sea
because it is lower than they are.
Humility gives it its power. If you want to govern the people,
you must place yourself below them.
If you want to lead the people,
you must learn how to follow them. The Master is above the people,
and no one feels oppressed.
She goes ahead of the people,
and no one feels manipulated.
The whole world is grateful to her.
Because she competes with no one,
no one can compete with her.

Power and dominance are often paired, but can be separate as well...to add another angle...submission can also be linked to power...a skillful manipulator can shift from dominance to submission and maintain or increase their power...as was pointed out if you know/master yourself you will have the wisdom/power needed to control others...

Palpatine manipulated the masses from the shadows being dominant or submissive as the situation called for it, once he had reached the appropriate conditions he stepped out of the shadows cloaked in power...

While I don't necessarily agree with your definition of dominance (I prefer one based on authority, rather than oppression), I will say that I believe the following:

• You can be powerful without asserting dominance.
• You can assert dominance without being powerful.
• You can do either, neither, or both, for good or for ill.

Thanks, both Alex and Ryu.

Steamboat, I only use that definition because "authority" is too passive for what I was trying to say. I meant an active use of dominating.

I think that it is possible to have power that is not applied (latent power? dormant power? passive power? :huh: ), probably because I agree with your definition:

Connor Lidell wrote: I would say that Power = the ability to influence...

When the ability stays only as that - ability - rather than being manifested...despite the presence of power, I don't believe that dominance is asserted.

The above rambling of mine doesn't really answer your questions...but I think I'm going to think on them for a while and come back to this.

For me the popular use of power is the expression of power, which seems to imply application of something, some quantity. I then automatically assume it to be reducing by the action of its application... but it could be part of a more complex system where power is effectively without limit (in terms of the systems functioning). So then it seems logically to recognize a capacity for power if it exists interfaced to, or within a, system... as its own value. This concept I better try to use at the moment is power for the capacity to express force, and so force is the power being expressed.

In that regard then, power can be used to dominate because it represents a capability to exert some force.... but in human term's it might be better termed authority - unless talking about physicality.

For example, I have power over you does not mean I'm pushing your face in the dirt, that would be me forcing your face in the dirt. Having power would be if you knew I could push your face in the dirt and therefore you acted to my will to avoid it happening. Do I have authority seems to imply some agreed parameters of relationship, is it inside those agreed parameters or outside determines whether its leadership or something else.

Domination sounds like a state of competition, and should not exist if authority is not being abused. If someone in power (authority; capacity to exert controlling force) starts to redefine the nature of that authority outside of its purpose then they are competing, probably unfairly, against the nature of the relationships for which they have authority over.

Yes I have had a large coffee, so I apologize if thats all over the place :lol:

Power is not a thing but a relation and so can be both repressive and productive. Power manages relations. Power is not only exercised by political institutions but is exercised everywhere in society from governmental laws to social relations among persons to that of a person toward their own body. The exercise of power is strategic. Dominance is one form of the exercise of power. Most importantly, power produces different kinds of knowledge. What and how knowledge is gathered and disseminated is a form of power. Even what is and is not considered knowledge is determined by power. For example, science, “is a particular set of codified relations between a precisely constructed knower and a precisely constructed object, with strict rules which govern the formation of concepts” (http://www.michel-foucault.com/concepts/index.html). Twentieth century French philosopher, Michel Foucault, posited a theory of science as a kind of power/knowledge that has set itself up as the essential form of rational thought; as the best and most privileged method of accessing truth. For any kind of knowledge to be valued as truth “it had to constantly strive to become scientific, to construct and organize concepts according to certain rigorous criteria of scientificity. Foucault argues that scientific knowledge is not inherently ‘superior’ or more ‘true’ than other forms of knowledge” (ibid). Science seeks to dominate knowledge by making it the quintessential and normative form of rationality.

Connor Lidell wrote: Hi everybody. I've been thinking about this lately, and I'd love to hear some other thoughts on this subject.

Whenever I come out and use my influence, I always feel as though I am subjugating others. When I achieve my goals, such as getting a role in a show, or getting a good grade in a class (as such being elected to Class Leader), I am forcing others to be subjugated to me. When I help others, they suddenly become "less" than me somehow in my perception. I also have an instinct that it does NOT have to be this way.

I think you're being too sensitive. If you take great pleasure in power and dominance and they are your goals I would worry about them. The fact that you wonder is good.

I didn't say it was a bad thing. Just something I observed.