giovanni
Member
odi profanum vulgus, et arceo
Posts: 2,627
|
Post by giovanni on May 12, 2005 12:27:03 GMT
Power, from Latin "potis" (master) esse (to be). To be master of something or even somebody.
Authority, from Latin "augesco", to grow, in all sense, also spiritual. A man with authority takes care of the growth of his similar.
|
|
|
Post by taylorsman on May 12, 2005 22:04:35 GMT
Giovanni, there can be situations where there is Authority but without the Power to enforce it, and Power which has no Authority to justify it and there can be Limited Authority.
As an example take the Pope, any Pope , but the new one Benedict XVI will do just fine. He would claim to have plenty of Authority, indeed that it dates back to the Apostle Peter and from Christ himself. However as far as I am concerned he is just a man and I totally ignore any pronouncements he may make as I a not an RC, and there are millions like me with whom his writ does not run. He has the Authority, but as there is no longer the Inquisition with Temporal Powers backing it he has no Power to enforce his dictates on those who chose to ignore him. Compare that to Gangland Bosses . They have no Authority, indeed they are outwith the Law but they most certainly have the Power to enforce their wishes and it would be a fool who got on the wrong side of them.
Then as regards Limited Authority, take as an example the Management where I work. On their premises and during my hours of work they certainly have Authority over me and the Power to enforce it with sanctions such as dismissal if I infringe their rules and policies. However, unless I am representing them elsewhere, say at a Customers's or Supplier's premises, then they have no Authority over me outside of working hours or premises, and unless I am working for a Trade Competitor what I do in my spare time is my business, my Manager is just another bloke if I meet him in town on a Saturday, nothing special.
So both of these attributes have their limitations. Although it is desirable to have both, I'd settle for Power if I had to make the choice.
|
|
ruffashlar
Member
Lodge Milncroft No. 1515 (GLoS), Govanhill Royal Arch Chapter 523 (S.G.R.A.C.S.)
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by ruffashlar on May 13, 2005 2:23:19 GMT
Power is from French pouvoir, ultimately from Latin posse, to be able; hence potestas, Italian podesta'.
Authority is from Latin auctoritas, the prerogative flowing from being an auctor, an author. Note that in Classical thought, a man's author was his father, and all divine as well as State authority derives from the first principle that a father had power of life and death over his issue. This is why there is no legal term of Roman origin for a father who kills his own children.
|
|
giovanni
Member
odi profanum vulgus, et arceo
Posts: 2,627
|
Post by giovanni on May 13, 2005 8:01:28 GMT
Steve, the example of the Gangland Bosses centres the target. They have power, but they lack authority.
Ruff The Latin “posse” is the union of “potis” and “esse”. Authority stems from “auctoritas”, whose root is “auc/aug”. “Augeo” means to increase, and “auctio” is auction, a sale where man can increase his offer. So Authority implies the notion of growth.
As Freemason, we should always remember that we must care our neighbour, if we want to build a better society.
Authority without power may be useless, but power without authority is pure dictatorship, which Freemasonry has always rejected.
|
|
|
Post by a on May 13, 2005 11:34:59 GMT
What is power?
Is the ability to bully others into doing what you want real power? Or is it just darkness? I would suggest that real power, in the political sense, is only held when you have the genuine hertfelt support of your people. Genuine respect goes a long way, though many people I guess who think that they are respected are actually feared. It can be easy to get darkness and light confused.
What is authority?
The ability to get people to do things because you have asked them? Or is this power? Does authority imply a Governmental position?
So what is power?
Some say that power is freedom, and I can understand that argument. Others say that power is a means to get respect. Others see power as a necessary by product or hinderance to their life.
To me, power is a very personal thing. Thoughts are very powerful, which is one reason why some regimes may try to limit critical thought. For everything starts with a thought. Can't get much more powerful than that.
To me, there is far too much focus on gaining power in our world. In our physical existance, some have to lead, and others follow, for not everyone can lead. But everyone shares the power, even if they don't realise it. For ultimately our leaders only have power because we give it to them.
Consider George Washington et all and the Declaration of Independance. The French revolution. Two cases where the people removed the power of leaders. More recently and from a more positive perspective consider the European Union, for all of its faults, more countries wish to join and share the benefits of becoming one people, strength in diversity, which is enhancing its power.
I would imagine that our world powers have huge dilemas on their hands. On the one hand they have to continue their own growth without letting the power lead to loosing control of their egos, and simultaneously they have to deal with the raw, frustrated, insecure, as well as the balanced individual powers that are found not only within every human but in every other thing as well, from viruses, to Mother Nature.
A little more harmony, Ma'at, balance would increase effective power enormously in our world, in all sorts of ways.
Just some thoughts.
|
|
giovanni
Member
odi profanum vulgus, et arceo
Posts: 2,627
|
Post by giovanni on May 13, 2005 14:47:16 GMT
IMO between authority and power there's the same difference as of strength and violence.
Violence requires strength, but the latter is a prerogative of the initiate, symbolized by the statue of Hercules.
A nice week end to all!
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on May 13, 2005 21:36:53 GMT
What is authority? The ability to get people to do things because you have asked them? Stewart I have noticed after 30 years of leading guided meditations based on rising on the planes that even though people "drift off" and do not hear what I say, that nevertheless they do keep up on the correct step of Jacobs ladder. So that when they return to hearing the guided meditation they discover that they are on the same step as everyone else. (The group needs to be at the same subplane at the same time to build a coherent group light body) My conclusion (supported by other observations) is that the internal intelligences in the meditators take direction from me during the meditation. Hence when the witnesser is away, the parts that are doing the meditation continue as instructed. I suggest this is an example of authority. It is not really an example of power because I do not use power in the process - although I could. Cheers Russell
|
|
ruffashlar
Member
Lodge Milncroft No. 1515 (GLoS), Govanhill Royal Arch Chapter 523 (S.G.R.A.C.S.)
Posts: 2,184
|
Post by ruffashlar on May 13, 2005 22:51:49 GMT
Power is ability: you become able as a function of allowing yourself to be enabled - whether you have any ability or not. Look at Politics: that's full of people in positions of power who don't deserve to mop the floor in the Commons bar.
Authority is two things: the licence to use power (which people in power use to justify their worthless existences); and the right to command power, otherwise identified as being worthy of respect (which is the virtue of those who ought to be in power).
It almost goes without saying that having power produces worth of respect; but that holding power virtually exempts you from being respected by anyone.
That is why the unspoken third element in this equation is the threat of violence, represented in Roman iconography by the fascis or bundle of spears. The power of the State is the authority to exercise the threat of violence and even violence itself.
Indeed, in some societies and regimes, it has overtaken all other ministries and departments of State to become the principal activity and purpose of the State.
|
|
|
Post by taylorsman on May 14, 2005 7:22:51 GMT
A good analysis Ruff. Unless there is a the real threat of tangible punishment for infractions then all the Authority in the World or the stated Power is of little use. This is of course most evident in Fascist and the old style Communist regimes and other such Dictatorships but even to a lesser extent in a Democracy. As an example I only buy a TV licence because of the fear of the £1000 fine for being caught without one. This threat is real as there are reports from time to time in the media of people being prosecuted and fined when caught without one. If the matter was not prosecuted then the threat would be hollow. Again when at school I always did the homework set by those teachers who would use corporal punishment, the strap, on me if I didn't but might not bother to if the teacher in question did not use this sanction for non compliance, but only gave Lines or some lesser punishment.
So there are as you say, three aspects, Power, the Authority to use it, and the Will to actually use force to ensure compliance to demonstrate the Power and underwrite the Authority. A example of this is that of Bosses who have the power to fire lazy, bullying, or grossly incompetent employees but, even when the case is clearcut and all the correct disciplinary proceedures have been followed they are too diffident to do so. This lessens respect for them and the Rules of that workplace in the eyes of the majority of decent, hardworking and able employees. It is bad to abuse the Powers one may have but even worse to have them but NOT use them when the need arises.
|
|
giovanni
Member
odi profanum vulgus, et arceo
Posts: 2,627
|
Post by giovanni on May 16, 2005 7:51:12 GMT
I think that we can put down some conclusions. As Freemasons, we should prefer authority to power. Nevertheless, if we are called to take power, we should not refuse it. To the contrary, we should use it in a "masonic" style. Jesus said to his apostles that they were not "of" the world, but "in" the world: so, in this world we are called to operate. We must face our liabilities. Bro. Gottlieb Fichte, in his essay Philosophy of Freemasonry, wrote that a MM is capable to look to Heaven, keeping however his feet firmly on earth. It is then a matter of equilibrium, of balance: we should walk on the middle, on the invisible line which separates the black tiles from the whit ones in the chequered pavement.
|
|
|
Post by taylorsman on May 18, 2005 1:41:22 GMT
Giving it much thought, I have to say that for Stewart's Quixotic "Impossible Dream" to have any fruition in practical terms it would require British Freemasonry to become actively involved in Politics, not on the basis of Individual Politicians who happen to be Freemasons, as is the case at present, but to take a defined political stance with policies backed by Freemasonry as an institution or even to endorse one Party over the others.
Now I can't speak for the Irregular Lodges but such an idea would be out of the question for Regular Masonic Bodies such as UGLE who make a great play of the point that they will not be drawn into political controversy, ban Party Political discussion in their Lodges and have even withdrawn Recognition and banned Members from attending foreign Grand Lodges which have become involved in the Politics of their country.
I can however see the appeal of such involvement as the present Political parties have made such a pigs ear of it in recent time, one having fosaken its roots and principles in the wish to be "In Office" at any price , whilst the other seems to have lost its way and cannot find a dynamic, charismatic, and inspiring Leader to replace one it once had and is riven with dissent between a dwindling band of Traditionalists and those who, emulating their opponents, wish to ditch their principles and "Modernise" which will result in their being different to the present governing party only in petty points of detail and the colour of their rosettes.
However, I cannot see Freemasonry in this country ever changing its policy on this matter and given the hostility of two of the main and electable British Political Parties to Freemasonry these days I cannot see much in the way of Masonic Influence being brought to bear by the individual Local Councillor or MP, ( or even Assembly Member), be that perceived to be for good or ill.
|
|