This is a tough question I've thought about a long time. I have no answer, just views. Here they are from an old post on a different forum.
First of all, let me just say that the quote dates back since the time of the Bible. Throughout history, famous philosopers such as Francis Bacon and Michel Foucault wrote about power. If the quote or topic was made or researched by philosophers, I think we can all agree that the quote was originally written to be taken in a philosophical sense.
So the argument is "is all knowledge power?" I don't think that question itself can be answered by anyone, not without some careful analysis. Philosophy is all about analysis. To answer this question, first we have to think about what each word in the question means. What is "power"? What is "knowledge"? What is "all"? What is "is"? Taking that into account, the question becomes even more complex. Once we think about what each word means, we can move on and think about if all knowledge is really power.
Is it all power? If I know how to crack my knuckles, know how many t-shirts I have in my closet, know that when I wink, my other eye winks by force, am I more powerful than someone else? After all, (all) knowledge is power, right? Whether this type of knowledge is power can also be argued upon. This is why knowledge has to be defined. Does knowledge mean any sort of information you have in your brain, or does it have to have some importance? Even estimating the importance of it is a issue all in itself. Some people might consider it important, others not. So in a way, we can say that it is a selective process that humans made up- all based on culture, morals, teachings, and information passed among generations.
What is power? If knowledge is power, then is having a lot knowledge an advantage or a disadvantage? If I was an omniscient, and knew all, I'd wonder how many times I'd think about suicide. The fact that you know all, is overwhelming. Knowing what others think about you, learning that people betray you, don't love you, cheat on you, knowing when you will die and your loved ones will die, that's over the line. Even if you weren't an omniscient, I think that the more you know, the more "knowledge" you posses, the more worries you have. A child who is naive doesn't have much to worry about. He doesn't have the knowledge of responsibility. Adults have bills to pay and a family to raise, let alone their personal life. Chances are that the more "knowledge" you have, the more responsibility you have, and with that, comes stress. The question whether stress is good is another issue.
If we defined "power" and "knowledge" can we still answer the question? Probably not. I know I can't. Even if someone possessed all the knowledge in the world, can they use it? I know people who know everything about programming. All the theory. Know computer science in an out. They know the theory, but can't write a single useful application. They have the knowledge, even have knowledge on applying that knowledge, but can't apply it. The idea of application loops back to power again. Does power mean you have to be able to apply it also?
I hope you can understand what I'm getting at. There are too many issues to think about and we'll never get a straight answer because it's all a matter of interpretation.
