While reading selections from John Locke's "Essay Concerning Human Understanding" today, I came across some interesting lines concerning the nature of power. That isn't to say that the rest of Locke lacks interest, just that these really struck a chord with me. Perhaps you'll see why:
"The mind being everyday informed, by the senses, of the alteration of those simple ideas it observes in things without: and taking notice how one comes to an end, and ceases to be, and another begins to exist which was not before... considers in one thing the possibility of having any of its simple ideas changed, and in another the possibility of making that change; and so comes by that idea which we call power.
Thus we say Fire has a power to melt gold... and gold the power to be melted; that the sun has the power to blanch wax, and wax the power to be blanched by the sun...
Power, thus considered is two-fold, viz. as able to make, or able to receive any change. The one may be called Active, and the other Passive power." (2.10.1-2.)
Of course, my first thought when I read this was "Holy S--t! That's aikido," which I'm sure was your response as well. This is a wonderful dichotomy Locke sets up here, and it can be applied to martial arts easily: Striking arts would embody active power--the ability to apply force and change whatever object it is acting upon. Aikido, on the other hand, embodies the idea of passive power, or the ability to change when force is applied to it.
This idea of the ability to change, the ability flow with whatever pressure is being applied to you, as power, is beautiful to me.
SVV
Headlong
Pretty cool, H. Here Locke takes power i its colloquial meaning as something like "ability". You have the ability to push me or I have the ability to be pushed by you.
ReplyDeleteThere's not really, so far as I know a real physical property that is passive power (but maybe...). With the scientific def'n of power ("ability to make things move") there is not an "ability to allow myself to be moved" is there?
Anyway, from a coloquial POV it seems like a good construct. similar to saying, "you never know if you can over-power the opponent, but you can know for sure that you can under-power anyone."
I agree with power translating to ability here; its certainly not an idea of charging up a fire ball/ki-blast or anything, though that would be pretty awesome...
ReplyDeleteBut is ability not a type of power? Im thinking along the lines of potential energy here, ability being the potential for action--or power in the Lockean vernacular.
H.