Life’s all about advantage, bare with me.

First knowledge is power in a contextual sense, even the flowers bob’s wife knows about. E.g. If she knows more about flowers than miss Jones, and she and miss Jones are in a race to develop a new breed or type, then there is a likelihood that bobs wife will win because she has a better knowledgebase to draw upon, therefore has an advantage in knowing what may work out and what probably wont, hence saving her time and effort and supplying her with the power to win the race.

The saving of time and effort is an age old issue within the human race, developing to walk upright saving us time and effort, therefore having more time and energy to have sex. More sex meant more offspring and therefore more hands on resources to gather food and fight, and more vessels of genetic information to continue our species

So from this little rant, I can give you the fact that having knowledge saves us time, effort and resources therefore making us better equipped the beat our rivals and ensure our own survival.

I’d say that makes us more powerful than those that fail around us. But maybe to be truly powerful is to use that knowledge that we have gained to help those that are failing around us and try to ensure there survival as well as are own.

Spikes

Geek chicks in thongs…….. Heaven!

I agree. I think ALL knowledge is power. I think some people just look at small, seemingly useless pieces of knowledge, and assume that they wield no power whatsoever. An example before was knowing how many t-shirts were in your closet. well, this may not be important to you, but by ME knowing exactly how many t-shirts I have in my closet, I know how many I need to buy, how many I have to choose from today when I get dressed, how many I can afford to lose by wearing some to work or wear to do an oil change on my car etc. etc. Sure, knowing how many t-shirts I have isn’t much knowledge, but DOES give me some power, not much, but some. It may not be a power that I can use against someone else, but it can help me save time and effort, which like spikes said is power nonetheless. Just because someone thinks of some miniscule piece of knowledge they have that they think is useless, doesn't mean it is. like said before, the Neanderthals thought that hitting two stones together to produce sparks was silly and useless, until someone used it to make fire. To reiterate, ALL knowledge is power but that doesn't mean that the power resulting from the knowledge is going to be anything great, but existent nonetheless.

p.s. sorry for not sticking to the subject, I just thought that the whole "knowledge is power" debate looked like fun and decided to put in my 2/100 :)

I agree. I think ALL knowledge is power. I think some people just look at small, seemingly useless pieces of knowledge, and assume that they wield no power whatsoever. An example before was knowing how many t-shirts were in your closet. well, this may not be important to you, but by ME knowing exactly how many t-shirts I have in my closet, I know how many I need to buy, how many I have to choose from today when I get dressed, how many I can afford to lose by wearing some to work or wear to do an oil change on my car etc. etc. Sure, knowing how many t-shirts I have isnt much knowledge, but DOES give me some power, not much, but some. It may not be a power that I can use against someone else, but it can help me save time and effort, which like spikes said is power nonetheless. Just because someone thinks of some miniscule piece of knowledge they have that they think is useless, doesn't mean it is. like said before, the Neanderthals thought that hitting two stones together to produce sparks was silly and useless, until someone used it to make fire. To reiterate, ALL knowledge is power but that doesn't mean that the power resulting from the knowledge is going to be anything great, but existent nonetheless.

What's your definition of power? You talk about wielding power - I don't see any of that going on in your example about the t-shirts. It's just knowledge.

As for the Neanderthals, who knows what they thought? But if you're right, if there was a time when hitting two stones together *wasn't* used to make fire, what power did that knowledge give them at that point in time? Sure, when they could make fire with it, the situation changed. But before that?

Don't let me butt in, but I have an addition to Bob's more-than-profound comments.

Based on the assumtion that power is derived from, or otherwise is faceted to knowledge, I'd have to agree with him in the idea that knowledge is not power. Basically, you must first define both power and knowledge. If power is the ability to develop spontaneous advantage over a competitor; and knowlegde is the accumulation of factual data, the two are not really compatible and knowledge is not necessarily in symmetry with power.

In that game, the only advantage you could glean over a competitor would be derived from factual data that your competitor did not also posess, which Bob pointed out early in the thread.

IMHO, a true advantage over competition is derived from the ability to reason, or process the data in a more efficient manner than a competitor. Anyone can memorize all the data in all the published games of Trivial Pursuit, but it does you no good if you dont posess the ability to compile that data and modify it fit external influence.

Now, define competition. :D (enter the game theory debate)

on edit: On the t-shirts issue: I have no idea how many t-shirts I own, I do know that I don't need to buy any new ones. Conversely, if I did know that I didn't own any t-shirts, I would know that I needed to buy at least one. The decision of how many t-shirts I purchased would rely on a process of reasoning involving many variables; days of week to wear a t-shirt, weeks between washings, public appearances which I didn't want to smell gamey at, etc.
-gkd

Umm does turning of the power at the wall on a computer novices/idiots machine countknowing that he will never check there.

Power is relative depending upon where you are and what U do. 25 years ago the worlds weathiest person or corporation didnt have acess to the amount of information and knowledge that anyone with a pc and a internet connection can have now.

In the middle ages, only the very intelligent could do long division.

It is the futre that will judge, not ourselves so keep hoping they dont invent time machines

Based on the assumtion that power is derived from, or otherwise is faceted to knowledge, I'd have to agree with him in the idea that knowledge is not power. Basically, you must first define both power and knowledge. If power is the ability to develop spontaneous advantage over a competitor; and knowlegde is the accumulation of factual data, the two are not really compatible and knowledge is not necessarily in symmetry with power.

?

Compatibility and similarity are not the same thing. I can see your point on the two not being similar or mirror images of one another (as a perspective). However, just because two things are not the same does not mean they are not compatible. Personally, I think knowledge and power in today's society are the same.

In most circumstances in society knowledge is compatible with power and is the key factor. You could even make the jump from there that knowledge is power, since we are relating it to the modern world society, and most people who follow that comment exclude backwoods wrestling. The 'power' I am referring to being in the modern world, not where brute physical force is the key. Last I checked on wall street and in the cubicles it wasn't physical force that got those individuals their jobs and power (although you should see what happens when people come in to work drunk).

Knowledge can be used in different fashions, such as obtaining power over someone or obtaining power with someone. A person who has knowledge of an intricate system can use that knowledge to gain power over that system or individuals within an affected area. Same thing with going to college to climb the corporate latter or gaining knowledge to change a political system. Either way, its still the knowledge that lead to the power in every modern situation.... thus making knowledge and power in today's society one in the same.

Interesting treatment. I hate tracking, but I'll do it anyway...

?Compatibility and similarity are not the same thing.

You're somewhat correct - dependant upon the context - but this is not what I'm talking about. Granted, this is the most semantic discussion I've had in a decade, but there are still some very logical principles here. In fact, the only way - IMHO - to discern any truth in this discussion, is through logical truth functions. While knowledge and power themselves do not share symmetry, they may be individual elements of some higher truth (another discussion altogether). Notice my use of small "t" versus caps "T" in the wordtruth, ultimately the understanding of fundamental Truth, even when it applies to knowledge, is a personal determination and beyond the trivial scope of this message board.

I can see your point on the two not being similar or mirror images of one another (as a perspective). However, just because two things are not the same does not mean they are not compatible. Personally, I think knowledge and power in today's society are the same.

On an elemental level, what I'm saying is that knowledge and power are neither mutlually exclusive or mutually inclusive. There is a great deal of complexity here, which is why I applied some simple logic to my statement (notice the conditional). ie:
...
IF Knowledge=the accumulation of factual data
AND IF Power=the ability to develop spontaneous advantage over a competitor
THEN the accumulation of factual data /= the ability to develop spontaneous advantage over a competitor mainly becuase there are many other variables that lend themselves to the derivation of power which do not reside solely in the domain of knowledge. My example isreason.
I should say that Reason is the ability to logically manipluate knowledge in a manner unique to an individual which knowledge itself does not make that individual capable of, so that the two (knowledge and reason) are in no way married in some nebulous definition conflict.
...
In most circumstances in society knowledge is compatible with power and is the key factor. You could even make the jump from there that knowledge is power, since we are relating it to the modern world society, and most people who follow that comment exclude backwoods wrestling. The 'power' I am referring to being in the modern world, not where brute physical force is the key. Last I checked on wall street and in the cubicles it wasn't physical force that got those individuals their jobs and power (although you should see what happens when people come in to work drunk).
I'm going to have to assume some of what you're saying here, largely because I'm confused as to why wrestling, brute physical force or coming to work intoxicated would have much to do with either knowledgeor power (other than being an expression of a lack of either or both). In reality, the definitions of both knowledge and power here should be applicable to, and elements of, all societies modern or not. Only by scaling your definition to fit the realm of all acheivable levels will you find a significant degree of fact - it's at this point that the majority of the bias will be eliminated.

Knowledge can be used in different fashions...

You're right, which is why some degree of modeling should be applied to specific considerations of such conceptually malliable topics; note the stochastic logical process I used earlier. ...such as obtaining power over someone or obtaining power with someone. A person who has knowledge of an intricate system can use that knowledge to gain power over that system or individuals within an affected area. Same thing with going to college to climb the corporate latter or gaining knowledge to change a political system. Either way, its still the knowledge that lead to the power in every modern situation.... thus making knowledge and power in today's society one in the same.

This doesn't really make sense. You really havent illustrated why any of these things would lend themselves to power, nor have you defined power. Can you elucidate why knowledge of an intricate system would make one powerful? For the time being, forget about the other references and focus on the "intricate systems". Specifically, determine why knowledge of an intricate system brings power rather than the reasoning behind the structure of the intricate system, ie: the ability to design a completely unique intricate system via a process of resoning based upon your knowledge of other unique intricate systems.

For example: in 225BCE, practically any Greek schmuck could tell you what a parabola looked like, which is more than I can say for the average highschool sophomore. So, big deal, right - a parabola is a curve other than a caternary or a hyperbola on Euclid's plane, you knew that! you have that knowledge, and therefore you've derived some power from that knowledge? What does it mean to justknow something?
In 225BCE, it was Archameides who described the parabola as 4/3 the area of a triangle with the same base and vertex and 2/3 of the area of the circumscribed parallelogram. In other words, A, A + A/4 , A + A/4 + A/16 , A + A/4 + A/16 + A/64 , ... and thusly: A(1 + 1/4 + 1/42 + 1/43 + ....) = (4/3)A. Now, that's power. He completely manipulated the known, and then understood, universe to apply a method of reasoning which measured the variability of functions that is fundamentaly the process by which we still base our understanding of variability - and its still only understood by the intellectual elite more than two thousand years later - and thats an elementary example.

Power is beyond even complex knowledge, it extends to understanding the fundamental processes behind that knowledge - part of such is the concept of reason. ;)

It could also be said that your knowledge of an intricate system truly is a fundamental understanding of the reasoning of the system, and therefore, your use of the term knowledge shares symmetry with my use of the term reason. The only disconnection in our arguments, then, would be found in our definitions of knowledge, and perhaps also in our definitions of power.

lol... once again I forgot to log in before posting:

============================================

Ahhh, I see. The perception that knowledge is not power but rather a tool (if used appropriatly) within the complexities of power. I don't agree. I think kowledge is power and just having it equates to power. Perhaps not the largest or complex power in the world but just by having the knowledge gains a power over those who do not have that knowledge. Understanding the fundamentals behind the knowledge may help to use the power properly. However, regardless of wether it is used or not, it is still there. One does not have to use the power gained by knowledge to nessecarily have it.

Side note (or bottom note?): I definitly see where you are coming from, and it is a valid way of looking at the issue. It's just not the road I'm taking with regards to it. Interestingly enough this is one of those things that can be looked at several different, ways with the perception being valid, without redifining or twisting terms to fit one's view. I just found that interesting.

Side note (or bottom note?): I definitly see where you are coming from, and it is a valid way of looking at the issue. It's just not the road I'm taking with regards to it. Interestingly enough this is one of those things that can be looked at several different, ways with the perception being valid, without redifining or twisting terms to fit one's view. I just found that interesting.

This is interesting. I keep returning to the consideration of the idea that the knowledge of some factr is, in and of itself, power.

I'm considering the knowledge of some 'thing' to be the simple memorization of a fact or value about that 'thing'. For example, some alphmetic equation (I'd use an arithmetic value, but that'd bee too simple to evaluate my example by) - alphametics is the study of single letters representing single unique digits which are then processed by arithmetic values to obtain letter sums - its recreational pseudo-cryptography.

If I only gave you the knowledge that j=7 and q=3, could you tell me what the following values for (x) and (p) should be?

(1) j+q=x, or
(2) q+p=j

Now, in terms of knowledge (through my definition if knowledge above) all we know is that j=7 and q=3. By using our knowledge of the two values I stated, we couldn't find for x, could we? We would have to memorize all the values for all letters for which values had been assigned. If the statemets are true, then you'd have to have memorized the values of (x) and (p) beforehand and the statements would be meaningless.

If you had already memorized, and therefore posessed, the knowledge of the values for the letters (x) and (p), you would already have known that x=10 and p=4, but you wouldnt have used the arithmetic statements to find the values, you'd have just known it, right? moving on...

to make it a little more complex: the following statement is a true alphametic, where each letter represents only one single unique digit, even if its repeated, and we're using base-10 (only single digits 0-9 are used):

SEND
+MORE
------
MONEY

From pure knowledge, one can't meaningfully discern anything from this, other than the fact the the values of (M) and (O) in the addend MONEY are the same values as the (M) and (O) in the sum, similarly, the (E)s in both addends also posess the same value as the (E) in the sum. Unfortunately, knowledge alone won't tell you any more than that.

Only through the ability to reason and rationalize the different numerical values which each letter might posess, and then perform simple addition with those values and compare them logically with the corresponding sum letter (does D+E=Y, or does 5+7=12, and why?) This is the unique solution to the alpahmetic:

9567
+1085
-------
10652

Cool, huh? but it took more than knowledge of the rules and memorization of any number-letter value to get to this solution; it required the ability to reason or otherwise apply a series of problem solving routines to the problem.

So, if knowledge is knowing the value of some fact r, then reason is the abilty to figure the value of r, r,,... rn from the knowledge of r and some external value.

This concept is not constrained within the bounds of mathematics, though, and aplies to just about everything where adaptation, invention and even basic decision are involved.
I'm sure you see where I'm going with this, so I'll stop before I get to the game theory idea I had. :cheesy:

I bet that what I am referring to as reason is what youre caling knowledge, and so our arguments aren't so far off. Am I right?

as i dredge up the past from the bowels of this forum.. i note in a not so subtle
matter that the question that was begging to be answered was not a raging
debate of wether or not knowledge is power but..
..."have you ever abused ur powers?"

simply, damn straight..

not so simply, sometimes out of necessity.. sometimes just for fun.. often out
of malice. send artificial emails from users that dont exist or ones that do..
a little chaos makes work fun. simulated power faliures on hot systems at
peak.[pull the plug out of the ups, then see if anyone was
REALLY werkin. The management slugs only notice when a customer
cries.. the customer wasnt working either..]
I have encouraged others to do so as well. Setup an unreal server on a
subnet and call them the "HR" systems.. but when paid for by the company,
they were "backups in case somthing goes down" even seen guys get paid to
come in and bogard confrence rooms during weekends and evenings whilst
they were "doing HR system maintenance". management even held meetings about the
HR boxes and decided they were so important they needed an UPS. haha
idiots. Favors are owed and tallies are kept. Almost a tit-for-tat system in
fact. This is what moved your ticket from the top of the que to limbo or what
solves all of your problems without a trace. It is also what puts you on call on
the weekends or gets you out of rotation 3 quarters in a row. BOFH is a
mantra.. a way of life. If they cry and give you raises you're doing it right.
Learn processes, manipulate, exploit and do it right guys, for the love of all
that makes people cry and jump out of windows.

Ive never abused my power of knowledge, admin, moderator, parent or anything else for that matter.. although tempting it wouldnt be a fair act me thinks ! ;)

I see it as my duty to use my "powers" to do things to people I don't like.

Sure,

I had a podmate at work whom was always checking his mail at mail2web.com. One day I was bored and went in to the host file and redirected mail2web.com and www.mail2web.com to a couple of um rather questionable websites. He ran all over the building looking asking people how that could have happened.

oh, ya, much better....catcall. A dos program I found online when I was living in college dorms. Uses your modem to repeatedly dial a list of numbers. Was pranking all my friends as I visited them so they wouldn't think it was me.

I used to be a tech support for Comcast Internet but I never used that knowledge to abuse others. :) Honestly i dont know how. I only abused my power to my roomate because he was small...hahahahahaha I used to be the bully...bwahahahahaha (kidding)

Thanks for bumping a thread that's been dead for six years. ;)

and thank you Dani for encouraging such spammers

For those who are thinking that I do spamming, well am sorry to tell you that i was only enjoying answering threads. I am new here so I was not aware of the dates these threads are posted. If you check my profile it is definitely new and i am not spamming or something.

I'll believe you when you get rid of you signature-links. Until then, you're yet another signature-spammer to me.

Why should I spam here? I know that I will be tagged as spam if I do that. Well whatever you guys wanna say. But i definitely enjoy answering forums here.

I am new here so I was not aware of the dates these threads are posted. If you check my profile it is definitely new and i am not spamming or something.

And stellarios is new here as well, but posts from exactly the same IP as you, and has the exact same signature links as you, and oddly enough voted down the same posting as you after you stated you would "deal with" the posters reputation. Odd that...

Almost as odd as user snipzers who has a different IP to post from, but the exact same signature links as you, and also downvoted that post.

Or how about the other handful of brand new accounts all started on the same day, all with no posts but all of whom happened to downvote that same members post that you threatened to 'deal with' on the reputation front?

You can see why someone might think that these were all the same person, and that person was involved in some kind of spamming activity can't you?