[HN Gopher] Strategy 101: An introduction to power
___________________________________________________________________
Strategy 101: An introduction to power
Author : mwfogleman
Score : 89 points
Date : 2022-11-19 18:54 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (tasshin.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (tasshin.com)
| recuter wrote:
| William Dttmer defines strategy as "the means and methods
| required to satisfy the conditions necessary to achieving a
| system's ultimate goal."
|
| Alright. Well that's a very long winded way of saying 'general
| plan' with a useless pet definition that adds nothing by some
| dude. Similarly, if you are interested in
| strategy, you will inevitably encounter military and business
| strategy. That doesn't mean you need to enlist in the military,
| or sprout pointy hair.
|
| No kidding? This is promptly followed by 'Conjoined Triangles of
| Success' type graphics. This insight, that
| strategy is iterative, is the core of John Boyd's OODA loop. OODA
| is an acronym for Observe, Orient, Decide, and Act.
|
| This insight, throwing spaghetti at the wall and seeing what
| sticks, is the core of Robert Matthew Van Winkle's SCALE loop.
| SCALE is an acronym for Stop, Collaborate, and Listen.
| ouid wrote:
| I dont care what the business majors come up with, as long as
| they do it in their own building.
| kbrkbr wrote:
| ,,One of the most fundamental lessons I learned from my training
| at the Monastic Academy was that wise and loving people should
| have power. Power is morally neutral--used by people who lack
| wisdom and love, it causes tremendous harm. Used by those who are
| wise and loving, it can be of tremendous benefit." This is one of
| these assertions that seem to make complete sense, until you
| realize that there is no agreed upon definition of "wise" and
| "loving", and thus we cannot even start to assess if it is wrong
| or right. Any assessment not starting with sorting this out will
| likely end up in circular reasoning (,,that guy is wise and
| loving, because he implements policies I like", ,,He implements
| policies I like, because he is wise and loving"). I do not intend
| to hate, and I do not know the author (seems respected judging by
| the comments), still if someone says a thing like this is the
| most fundamental lesson he learned, I fail to understand what he
| could mean. How could you learn this? It also seems a very
| simplistic model.
| mwfogleman wrote:
| I learned a lot of things there! The training I received was
| focused on two components, what they called Awakening and
| Responsibility--Awakening referring to contemplative practices
| and monastic structures designed to lead to classical
| enlightenment, and Responsibility was hands-on leadership
| training through helping their non-profit organization.
|
| Learning about power was indeed one of the most valuable
| lessons I learned there, specifically on the responsibility
| side. Basically, I went from not caring about power, and subtly
| believing I shouldn't have it, to believing that it's worth
| using the power I have to do good things. Nowadays, I spend
| most of my time doing service projects, using my power to
| benefit others. My blog and this post is one of them!
|
| My teacher had definitions of wisdom, love, and power that he
| shared in his teachings, which I personally found useful, but
| you're right, there aren't culturally agreed upon definitions
| of them. I find getting to know people over time gives you a
| sense of their character, their values, their strengths, and
| their weaknesses. When I meet someone I deem to be wise and
| loving, I want to help them, give them resources, connect them
| to people, and find other ways to support them.
|
| Just a few thoughts!
| DeepFriedButter wrote:
| Learn about the Munchhausen trilemma, even in mathematical
| logic it is not possible to formulate a proof that is neither,
| dogmatic, circular or regressive. For this reason I tend to
| refrain from making any of those objections when people talk
| about their personal motivations. I even think this was the
| best part of the blog, the other stuff was talk about cringe
| mind-maps with weird names like how a cult has special words
| for mundane stuff. I hate these galaxy brain types trying to
| escape their linear western way of thinking by employing the
| complex plane. If you want to read some meandering thought on
| why you should be a Machiavellian go and read "Politics as
| wish". A classic.
| kbrkbr wrote:
| I give you the Munchhausen or Agrippa"s trilemma. But in math
| we start with natural numbers or sets. Starting with ,,wise"
| and ,,loving" as primitives is a different thing.
|
| You can even treat mathematics as syntax, that only gets
| meaning when applied to the world. Then your primitives get
| meaning by what you can technically construct with it and by
| what you can predict with it. That together with the no
| miracles argument let's science circumvent the trilemma in my
| opinion. All that's needed is a pragmatic semantic, or better
| practice as a quite weak fundament.
| AmericanChopper wrote:
| You've simple renamed axioms, unprovable assumed truths, to
| "primitives". The munchhausen trilemma undermines all
| truths (at least all truths that anybody's every tried to
| prove so far), neither science nor mathematics circumvent
| it in any way. Any belief that they do is not a scientific
| or logical position, it's a faith based position (aka a
| religious belief).
| WaitWaitWha wrote:
| I learned it at L'Abri something similar, but with a solid
| foundation for the wisdom and love definition.
|
| With a fixed cornerstone, one can develop a solid world view
| and moral compass.
| mym1990 wrote:
| My interpretation of that bit is that seeking power does not
| make you a good or a bad person, just through the act alone.
| There is definitely an agreed upon definition of 'wise' and
| 'loving', look it up in any dictionary...what differs is how
| different people project those definitions onto other people.
|
| The thing about power is that it seems to be a corrupting force
| more often than not. If I had to take a guess, more people have
| started out with good intentions and gone to the dark side than
| the other way around. I think for this reason a lot of "wise"
| people avoid power like the plague.
| Spooky23 wrote:
| Power is an ability or attribute which I agree is morally
| neutral. But control is associated with power and that's
| where the moral component applies.
|
| The trouble is that inexperienced or immature people with
| power gravitate toward control of others and lack self
| control. If you ever worked for a "straw boss", you've seen
| what happens.
|
| In settings where organizational power and obedience is
| paramount, organizations usually seek to grow this ability to
| control oneself - military officers start as nominally in
| command but guided by sergeants. As officers move up the
| ranks, training focused on leadership and control is a core
| part of life.
|
| In high function professional organizations, usually leaders
| succeed to a point based more on the personal influential
| power than explicit power. People usually listen to a
| distinguished engineer even though they have little explicit
| control of anything.
| zmgsabst wrote:
| Adding a few thoughts, largely agreeing;
|
| Power is just the ability to effect change -- energy over
| time.
|
| Growing rice is power; and considerably more people have
| obtained power, as defined by imposing their will on their
| immediate environment, in the pursuit of feeding their
| families than any other use of power I can think of.
|
| I think that's the point here:
|
| In associating power with bad things, you're narrowing your
| perception of what power is, and hence limiting your ability
| to accrue it towards positive ends -- eg, feeding a lot of
| people.
|
| I think power itself is neutral; kind, manner, and use
| matter.
|
| To put it in a fantasy context:
|
| - Gandalf in Lord of the Rings is considered wise for
| refusing the One Ring and seeking to destroy it;
|
| - but there's no doubt that Gandalf is powerful -- he beats
| both a balrog and the Witch King in 1v1 personal combat;
|
| - and he's okay with accepting more power -- he accepted a
| ring of power from the elves.
|
| Personally, I think you can't be virtuous unless you're
| dangerous.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE0VM61O0XA
| mym1990 wrote:
| Social power is also somewhat logarithmic due to social
| structures and also things like economies of scale. The
| president of Monsanto has vastly more power than a single
| farmhand. With things like relationships, one can impact
| more than just the physical space around them as well.
|
| To the point about side effects, varying degrees of power
| bring other things with it...admiration, jealousy,
| competition, responsibility, etc...and most people can't
| and won't perform well under such pressure.
|
| While Gandalf is a good 'perfect' example, Frodo
| exemplifies the struggles of everyday people a bit better.
| We can see through the storyline how Frodo constantly
| struggles with the ring, and how close he comes to
| succumbing to it(Sam too!).
| peterxpark wrote:
| Personally, I think it's a huge issue that many people are
| terrified of power. That drive just goes underground and comes
| out likely in unhealthy ways then whether it's self-denial or
| self-righteousness (aka canceling) others. How to address the
| problem of self-delusion is through wisdom practices and caring
| for others.
|
| I also trained at the same place as Tasshin (hi tasshin!)
|
| MLK Jr. also addressed the same phenomenon:
|
| "Now a lot of us are preachers, and all of us have our moral
| convictions and concerns, and so often have problems with
| power. There is nothing wrong with power if power is used
| correctly. You see, what happened is that some of our
| philosophers got off base. And one of the great problems of
| history is that the concepts of love and power have usually
| been contrasted as opposites - polar opposites, so that love is
| identified with a resignation of power, and power with a denial
| of love.
|
| It was this misinterpretation that caused Nietzsche, who was a
| philosopher of the will to power, to reject the Christian
| concept of love. It was this same misinterpretation which
| induced Christian theologians to reject the Nietzschean
| philosophy of the will to power in the name of the Christian
| idea of love. Now, we've got to get this thing right. What is
| needed is a realization that power without love is reckless and
| abusive, and love without power is sentimental and anemic.
| Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice,
| and justice at its best is power correcting everything that
| stands against love. And this is what we must see as we move
| on. What has happened is that we have had it wrong and confused
| in our own country, and this has led Negro Americans in the
| past to seek their goals through power devoid of love and
| conscience. "
|
| http://www.blackhistoryheroes.com/2011/01/dr-martin-luther-k...
| pryelluw wrote:
| OT: The OPs newsletter is one for the few I actually subscribe
| and read. I met him IRL at a conference in Atlanta. Changed my
| life. We spoke for about 5 minutes and his words continue to
| resonate. Thank you, Tasshin!
| germinalphrase wrote:
| https://tasshin.com/join/
| [deleted]
| punkspider wrote:
| Thanks for mentioning he has a newsletter; I had no idea. I
| frequently refer to his article on how to use Twitter [1] and
| immediately got excited when I saw his blog on the front page.
| [1] https://tasshin.com/blog/a-guide-to-twitter/
| pphysch wrote:
| Where are "power" and "strategy" defined in this 101?
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-11-19 23:00 UTC)