Friedrich Nietzsche’s “On the Doctrine of the Feeling of Power” and Nancy Farmer’s novel, The House of the Scorpion, have many different elements in common, whereas they may not appear to be very similar on the surface. In addition, things such as other literature and reality bear relation to the highly applicable philosophies of Friedrich Nietzsche and the concepts of The House of the Scorpion. For instance, The House of the Scorpion and “On the Doctrine of the Feeling of Power” both relate to the idea of the conceiving of power. The dictionary defines power as meaning, “The ability or right to control people or things.” Indeed, this is often how people conceive of power, a state of control. However, when one begins to examine the inner workings of …show more content…
For instance, Nietzsche writes, “He who feels ‘I am in possession of the truth’--how many possessions does he not renounce in order to save this feeling! What would he not throw overboard in order to stay ‘on top’--that is, above the others who lack ‘the truth’” (Nietzsche 1). When Nietzsche writes this, he uses “I” many times, leading to a sort of emphasis on the word. The idea is that man will do anything to make sure that he remains in power. Because it is implied that the person in power shows no concern for anyone but themselves, it can be implied that with power comes narcissism. The House of the Scorpion emphasizes this point as well. When the author states, “El Patrón laughed. ‘That’s the stuff, Mi Vida. Get rid of your enemies when you can’” (Farmer 104). In this quote, El Patrón is showing no compassion for his enemies, and he is only looking out for the preservation of his power. Because he is worried only about his power, and not about any other people, he is a prime example of the narcissism that comes with power. Inspecting the importance of obtaining power leads to other concepts, such as Nietzsche’s agreeable
The word power makes some think of leadership, positive role models, and mentors, but sometimes power is a want that can overcome the actions of an individual in a negative way. The novel Unwind is about to runaways, Risa and Connor, who are trying to escape being unwound or dismantled till they are living in a divided state. In the novel UnWholly by Neal Shusterman, Connor and Risa have moved on since running away, and are now running the Graveyard, a safe place for runaways until they turn 17, and cannot be unwound. Both of the stories use symbolism and character archetype to imply the theme that wanting power of something you don't have can be tempting, but might not always be the right thing.
He references Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin as these specific men that only seek power as tyrants,
But first what is Power? When researching Power words such as authority, control, direct, command and influence all appear. These words all support the following statement “Power is the ability to influence and control the behaviour of others.” The problem with power is that it often leads to those in power abusing it. As Lord Acton famously quoted “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Task B With the arrival of behaviourism during the last century, a renewed, and fierce, debate concerning the concept of power ensued; Mills, Dahl, Polsby, Bachrach, Baratz, Lukes are some notable examples of thinkers on power. This review focusses on the discussion surrounding Lukes’ three dimensional view of power and the nature of power as being either a perceptual behaviour or something of a more structural nature. Isaac (1987) provides a detailed rationalist critique on the debate of power without taking part in it. Two main points of criticism anent the debate are that it limits itself to ‘power over’ (domination), and the failure to distinguish between possession and exercise of power (Isaac, 1987). Hayward’s article (2006) concerns itself with Lukes’ view on the relationship between power and responsibility, and Morriss (2006) argues Lukes’ theory does not concern power at all as it concerns domination without capacity.
Power Goes The term “power” exists as a vague and perpetually changing concept. Throughout history, power has become synonymous with physical strength, leadership, sophistry, etc. In the dance-theatre performance “Power Goes,” the Seldoms uses elements of movement, texts, and imagery to support one idea: Proper use of power can enhance individual social status and improve personal rights. Nevertheless, the abuse of power can lead to In the play “Power goes”, The Seldoms takes Lyndon B. Johnson as an example to define power as a political weapon.
Once someone has had a taste of power, they will do everything possible to hold onto it. Throughout Hosseini’s novel, characters gain and lose power. They also abuse power, whether through friendship or fear. They manipulate the powerless to stay in their position. In Khaled Hosseini’s
The sway of power perverts the human conscience, developing wicked
Indeed, the desire for power starts with basic needs and can develop to the point where people lose
These individuals show extreme self-love, delusions of their own greatness and cruelty. However these emotions are a result of an underlying insecurity or inferiority complex, which causes these individuals to display excessive aggression and cruelty to compensate for these insecurities and give an impression of greatness. An insecurity for Stalin could perhaps be his disfigured arm which resulted from his father’s beating, or his short height (he was 5’4 inches), which caused him to suffer from short man syndrome, which is the violence and authority practiced by short men to compensate for their height and assert their power. (Rayner, 2014). These insecurities may have caused Stalin to suffer from malignant narcissism.
Power can be used effectively for the overall improvement of a society, but ultimate power has almost no limits and very nearly guarantees absolute
Most people question, “ How does the quest of power cause people to act? ”. Over the years the question has been proved to cause people to act differently. Not just in history but in many movies, plays, books, and even in current events today. The quest of power drives people to do things out of their character.
When somebody receives incredible power, they also receive a large burden of responsibility. Some people, such as Napoleon, disregard these responsibilities and become corrupt. In reality, we have seen this in leaders such as Stalin, who became corrupt once into power. In “Animal Farm”, Napoleon, a totalitarian pig, is a great example of how too much power is equal to corruption.
Power can have the persuasive action in undoing the moral ethics of one’s character. This can be seen throughout history, such as World War II and proven by the actions of Napoleon in the allegory, Animal Farm, by George Orwell. As Lord Acton said “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” In history what was viewed as a villain, is never the same as the perception. A leader does not begin wanting to do wrong, they start with the best intentions, but power is a tricky thing.
There is nobody fear, the primitive instinct of domination sets it and corruption becomes rampant. Power is dangerous yet it’s marvelous, one must take caution if they have control, or the power will take them. Power is unpredictable, there is always too much or too little, if one has too little power they cannot be effective. If they have to much, the power takes control of them and they become corrupt. Whether it be causing hysteria over a crush, or ending the lives of hundreds of thousands of people to end a war.
A standout amongst the most critical strands is Bernard Reginster's (2006: 103–47) accentuation on Nietzsche's origination of energy as conquering resistance (BGE 259, 230; GM I, 13; II, 16–17; A 2; KSA 11[111] 13: 52–3; 14[173] 13: 358–60; 14[174] 13: 360–2; 11[75] 13: 37–8; 9[151] 12: 424). This origination interfaces control straightforwardly to the individual's ability to reshape her condition in the administration of her finishes, and it in this manner gives a more natural feeling of what, precisely, should be great about power. Likewise, the translation finds Nietzsche's view specifically athwart Schopenhauer's endeavors to inspire negativity by bid to a pervasive "will to life". By supplanting Schopenhauer's will to existence with his will to control (comprehended as a drive to defeat resistance, which wills the world's resistance alongside its beating; KSA 9[151] 12: 424), Nietzsche can contend that our fundamental condition as craving, endeavoring animals can prompt a method of presence deserving of support, as opposed to unavoidable dissatisfaction (as Schopenhauer had it). A similar origination has been produced by Paul Katsafanas (2013), who contends that, qua specialists, we are ineluctably dedicated to esteeming power in light of the fact that a Reginster-style will to power is a constitutive condition on