To dominate or to serve, there is the rub (reject, service)

[coberst]

To dominate or to serve, there is the rub.

It appears to me that our human instincts are to dominate or to serve. I would like to suggest that we concentrate our critical skills upon seeking to focus attention upon synthesis.

When I read history I see primarily a dual human need exerting itself—we seem to have a two class social system; we have the few who dominate the vast subservient majority. The subservient take this roll both because humans crave order and stability and because such a roll is the path to power. Humans crave dominance and they crave order and stability. Is their a third way?

When we are dominating objects we are united in a common goal. Our unified goal is to dominate objects as much as possible and we have proven to be very good at it. When we try to serve both a roll as dominant and as subversive we appear to create a society that is constantly at war with it self.

Power is the siren song we all hear. We all want power and we get it by dominating or we get it by being subservient to power. Our newspapers abound with such stories daily of the struggle for power, i.e. power is the means to get what we want when we want it.

Acquisition of power is a human imperative. We can acquire and use power either rationally or irrationally. One of the primary motivating forces behind irrational behavior is considered to be human egocentrism, which is “to view everything within the world in relationship to oneself, to be self-centered”.

To be rational in one’s desires is to use intellectual standards of thinking and to be irrational in one’s desires is to use egocentric standards to determine what to accept or what to reject as true.

[Random]

Originally Posted by coberst

To dominate or to serve, there is the rub.

It appears to me that our human instincts are to dominate or to serve. I would like to suggest that we concentrate our critical skills upon seeking to focus attention upon synthesis.

When I read history I see primarily a dual human need exerting itself—we seem to have a two class social system; we have the few who dominate the vast subservient majority. The subservient take this roll both because humans crave order and stability and because such a roll is the path to power. Humans crave dominance and they crave order and stability. Is their a third way?

When we are dominating objects we are united in a common goal. Our unified goal is to dominate objects as much as possible and we have proven to be very good at it. When we try to serve both a roll as dominant and as subversive we appear to create a society that is constantly at war with it self.

Power is the siren song we all hear. We all want power and we get it by dominating or we get it by being subservient to power. Our newspapers abound with such stories daily of the struggle for power, i.e. power is the means to get what we want when we want it.

Acquisition of power is a human imperative. We can acquire and use power either rationally or irrationally. One of the primary motivating forces behind irrational behavior is considered to be human egocentrism, which is “to view everything within the world in relationship to oneself, to be self-centered”.

To be rational in one’s desires is to use intellectual standards of thinking and to be irrational in one’s desires is to use egocentric standards to determine what to accept or what to reject as true.

Opposing dominance to service might suit the intellect, but the urge to dominate is self-serving and the urge to serve is dominant. That, I feel, is universal.

I do not agree with your association of intellectual standards with rationality nor do I agree human egocentrism is the primary motivation for irrationality. These assumptions are based on false distinctions between Self/World/Reality/God or whatever you want to call it. The intellect is a tool, useful for disseminating information and processesing probability ranges but too limited for reaching decisive conclusions on its own.

Certainly, we all want autonomy and power is an extension of that, but the craving for it can be transcended and the push-pull of dominant/servile brought into harmonious balance. Unfortunately, in the society at war with itself, most are driven to acquire and hoard without consideration for the alternatives.

[coberst]

Godlike says--"Certainly, we all want autonomy and power is an extension of that, but the craving for it can be transcended and the push-pull of dominant/servile brought into harmonious balance."

This "harmonious balance" and how to achieve it interests me. Could you elaborate?

[Random]

Originally Posted by coberst

Godlike says--"Certainly, we all want autonomy and power is an extension of that, but the craving for it can be transcended and the push-pull of dominant/servile brought into harmonious balance."

This "harmonious balance" and how to achieve it interests me. Could you elaborate?

Not at length here, no, for it's a personal journey. The question of how to reconcile our base urges with higher functions and ultimately live a happy life practically gave birth to religion. The goal is understanding, but you have to start and end with yourself because the World in in you. YOU are it. In this context, by light of reason and intuition, you can resolve any conflict: yes, even the dominance/servility ones. Part of it is making the transition from service-to-Self to service-to-Others, realizing that the latter is perhaps the greatest service one can do oneself. Hope that helps...

[Flappycat]

Anarchism. We've been doing it in the West for years. Look at the kind of people we lionize in our culture. Al Capone is as much a hero in our culture as he was a menace. The Mafia has inspired one of the most popular series on broadcast television. Did you ever watch The Chronicles of Riddick? The James Bond movies? The Indiana Jones series? If it's the individual against the masses and the powers that be, we just go gah-gah, kay? We even fell in love with Darth Vader because he was a loose cannon even among the other bad guys. We are a culture of anarchists, whether we like it or not, and this has taken us far.

[Random]

Originally Posted by Flappycat

Anarchism. We've been doing it in the West for years. Look at the kind of people we lionize in our culture. Al Capone is as much a hero in our culture as he was a menace. The Mafia has inspired one of the most popular series on broadcast television. Did you ever watch The Chronicles of Riddick? The James Bond movies? The Indiana Jones series? If it's the individual against the masses and the powers that be, we just go gah-gah, kay? We even fell in love with Darth Vader because he was a loose cannon even among the other bad guys. We are a culture of anarchists, whether we like it or not, and this has taken us far.

As an Anarchist myself, I agree with all of the above.

[Booko]

Originally Posted by coberst

To dominate or to serve, there is the rub.

It appears to me that our human instincts are to dominate or to serve. I would like to suggest that we concentrate our critical skills upon seeking to focus attention upon synthesis.

When I read history I see primarily a dual human need exerting itself—we seem to have a two class social system; we have the few who dominate the vast subservient majority. The subservient take this roll both because humans crave order and stability and because such a roll is the path to power. Humans crave dominance and they crave order and stability. Is their a third way?

Yes. that third way is called consultation, and is a big deal in my religion.

When we are dominating objects we are united in a common goal. Our unified goal is to dominate objects as much as possible and we have proven to be very good at it. When we try to serve both a roll as dominant and as subversive we appear to create a society that is constantly at war with it self.

I would argue that dominating causes disunity, not unity. The "war" comes from the resistance of those being dominated, and the "opponents" who also seek to dominate. An observation of politics illustrates this point.

Power is the siren song we all hear. We all want power and we get it by dominating or we get it by being subservient to power. Our newspapers abound with such stories daily of the struggle for power, i.e. power is the means to get what we want when we want it.

This is a very male-oriented view, and I suspect if you polled the women on RF, you would get a very different view of what half of the population wants. A female-oriented view seeks security, harmony, equitable treatment, and an environment that fosters strong loving relationships in family and neighborhoods.

Acquisition of power is a human imperative. We can acquire and use power either rationally or irrationally. One of the primary motivating forces behind irrational behavior is considered to be human egocentrism, which is “to view everything within the world in relationship to oneself, to be self-centered”.

There are many causes of irrational behaviour. The most obvious one is insanity, but we can ignore that cause for the purposes of this discussion, I should think.

Another cause is a disconnect between cognition and reality. This is commonly association with neuroses, I suppose. How many "control freaks" really want to control because they just want power? The motivation is usually much deeper than that, and typically goes to feelings of insecurity. The urge to control others is often based in the need to manage reality so one feels "safe" from whatever irrational fears one has.

And then there are just the people who want power because it gives them status in society. There's nothing inherently wrong with wanting status in society -- that's where a some of the innovation comes from. The destruction to society only come when someone wanting status gets it through disregard for others. The late unlamented Ken Lay is probably the poster child for this.

To be rational in one’s desires is to use intellectual standards of thinking and to be irrational in one’s desires is to use egocentric standards to determine what to accept or what to reject as true.

I suggest that intellect has less to do with rationality than a healthy emotional core. Without emotional balance, one cannot even tell truth from falsehood, because the ego will take over to protect itself from its irrational fears.

[Booko]

Originally Posted by Flappycat

Anarchism. We've been doing it in the West for years. Look at the kind of people we lionize in our culture. Al Capone is as much a hero in our culture as he was a menace. The Mafia has inspired one of the most popular series on broadcast television. Did you ever watch The Chronicles of Riddick? The James Bond movies? The Indiana Jones series? If it's the individual against the masses and the powers that be, we just go gah-gah, kay? We even fell in love with Darth Vader because he was a loose cannon even among the other bad guys. We are a culture of anarchists, whether we like it or not, and this has taken us far.

I wouldn't confuse the American ideal of "rugged individualism" or "standing up for your principles" with anarchy.

[Flappycat]

Bit it is anarchic, Booko. People just don't like to describe it as such. The ideas of individual liberty and entrepreneurship are naturally anarchic. The idea of the government being there to serve the people is anarchic, for it reduces the government to being a tool to our own ends instead of something to be upheld and defended for its own sake. Believe it. We are a culture of crazed anarchists in the eyes of more traditional cultures. They think we're running around humping everything that moves and killing everything else, and the funny thing is how completely wrong they are.

[coberst]

Booko says--"This is a very male-oriented view, and I suspect if you polled the women on RF, you would get a very different view of what half of the population wants. A female-oriented view seeks security, harmony, equitable treatment, and an environment that fosters strong loving relationships in family and neighborhoods."

It is your opinion then that the urge for power is a male thing and not a human thing. Do you know where I could find out more about this point of view?