[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Oleena wrote:
My objection is with your definition of power- power as defined in politics is the ability of one person to make another person do something.
And I call that coercion – NOT power.[/quote]
Coercion is a means to obtain power through force. Power as I definied can be obtained through many other avenues.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Oleena wrote:
My objection is with your definition of power- power as defined in politics is the ability of one person to make another person do something.
And I call that coercion – NOT power.
Coercion is a means to obtain power through force. Power as I definied can be obtained through many other avenues.
[/quote]
No. No. No. No.
Power does not exist therefore it cannot be obtained. Power is not a thing; it is not an action; it cannot be defined. You can’t hold it. No one can “have power”.
Coercion actually does exist because it is an action and I can observe and verify the actions of other people and test whether they agree with that definition. People can be coerced by violent intimidation or actual violence – what is sometimes also called “force” – though that is just an other physical abstraction word that has no meaning in this discussion.
Show me what power is and where I can get some.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Show me what power is and where I can get some.[/quote]
Sure. Which form of power would you like? (this isn’t a complete list…)
Charisma
Physical Might
Money
Sex
Power is like intelligence in that you cannot hand someone a box full of it; you can only watch it being demonstrated.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Show me what power is and where I can get some.
Sure. Which form of power would you like? (this isn’t a complete list…)
Charisma
Physical Might
Money
Sex
Power is like intelligence in that you cannot hand someone a box full of it; you can only watch it being demonstrated.
[/quote]
You are really just describing the same thing here…its coercion.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Oleena wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
Oleena wrote:
This only proves that I must have the best endurance of all, taking on at least two men in several different threads at one time, over time.
nope just that some of us have a low tolerance for how many juvenile comments we choose to deal with at one time . . . 
This from the guy that first states that animals have souls, then claims to know with certainty what happens to those souls after they die, and then refuses to answer further questions about the matter because he doesn’t want to look silly.
OK, Oleeme, Mr. Steel needs no defending from the likes of me but it’s time you took the time to shut the fuck up. Steel has bent over backwards attempting to answer your questions. Now you are getting trite, tedious and annoying. Not ankle-biting annoying. Open sewer smell annoying. It’s time to put the manhole lid back on you.[/quote]
Oh no, have I pissed off the big bad Pushme by expressing my opinion in a sarcastic tone over the internet? You grown men can play victim vs big bad Oleena all day while failing to take responsibility for your own jabs and insults. It’s a sad day when someone is inconvenienced by an internet forum.
Oh yeah…and I also meant to say: intelligence doesn’t really exist either; it is just a philosophical convenience word like “power”.
No scientist – or philosopher for that matter – could tell you what intelligence is or even how to measure it. What really matters is not “intelligence”, per se, but rather the capabilities that refer to “it” – thinking, etc.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Oleena wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Show me what power is and where I can get some.
Sure. Which form of power would you like? (this isn’t a complete list…)
Charisma
Physical Might
Money
Sex
Power is like intelligence in that you cannot hand someone a box full of it; you can only watch it being demonstrated.
You are really just describing the same thing here…its coercion.[/quote]
Well that’s not the definition that the dictionary has for the two, but for the point of communication I’ll accept your’s.
Someone is always willing to coerce someone else, sometimes without acknowledging that coercion is what’s happening (romantic relationships would be an example). How would an anarchist society stand up to the pressure of multiple people trying to coerce each other to gain one kind of advantage or another.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Oh yeah…and I also meant to say: intelligence doesn’t really exist either; it is just a philosophical convenience word like “power”.
No scientist – or philosopher for that matter – could tell you what intelligence is or even how to measure it. What really matters is not “intelligence”, per se, but rather the capabilities that refer to “it” – thinking, etc.[/quote]
Fair enough.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Someone is always willing to coerce someone else, sometimes without acknowledging that coercion is what’s happening (romantic relationships would be an example). How would an anarchist society stand up to the pressure of multiple people trying to coerce each other to gain one kind of advantage or another.
[/quote]
I know you will not like this answer but…I firmly believe the market will.
Coercion only works on a large scale when many people are willing to go along to it. If we are arguing that it is indeed an anarchist society already then why are we so certain 1) people will allow it and 2) others who live in this same society will be willing the take the risk to do it.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Oleena wrote:
And believe it or not, all joking and insults and such aside, you are making yourself look really dumb. Not with the the jabs and such - that can be fun and games - but with the ridiculous assertion that he hasn’t answered your questions. I know you’re not really interested in anything he has to say. You’re continuing to bait him just like you did with the quiz. And the baiting is no longer fun or interesting and it doesn’t stir up more valid debate; it’s just tedious yapping now. You know, the kind of tedious yapping that back in the Middle Ages would’ve earned a woman a good whippin’?
[/quote]
It’s always a person’s choice whether or not to continue participating in discussion.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Someone is always willing to coerce someone else, sometimes without acknowledging that coercion is what’s happening (romantic relationships would be an example). How would an anarchist society stand up to the pressure of multiple people trying to coerce each other to gain one kind of advantage or another.
I know you will not like this answer but…I firmly believe the market will.
Coercion only works on a large scale when many people are willing to go along to it. If we are arguing that it is indeed an anarchist society already then why are we so certain 1) people will allow it and 2) others who live in this same society will be willing the take the risk to do it.[/quote]
And what of monopolies?
[quote]Oleena wrote:
And what of monopolies?
[/quote]
And now for the easy part:
There are no monopolies except for state created ones.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Someone is always willing to coerce someone else, sometimes without acknowledging that coercion is what’s happening (romantic relationships would be an example). How would an anarchist society stand up to the pressure of multiple people trying to coerce each other to gain one kind of advantage or another.
I know you will not like this answer but…I firmly believe the market will.
Coercion only works on a large scale when many people are willing to go along to it. If we are arguing that it is indeed an anarchist society already then why are we so certain 1) people will allow it and 2) others who live in this same society will be willing the take the risk to do it.[/quote]
The basic scenario that I’m imagining when discussing this with you looks like this:
The Johnson family has a great deal of money. The wife has fallen into the position of director of the family because everyone else is too lazy to do so and as such she does a lot of work making sure everyone is accomplishing what they need to. One day Mrs. Johnson figures out that she would have more money to buy her son a college education with if Mr. Johnson were to take some from the Jeffersons across the street. Thus, she sleeps with Mr. Jefferson while Mr. Johnson robs the Jefferson family blind. Mr. Jefferson never finds out, while Mr. Johnson nearly doubles his wealth and sends his child to college. Mr. Jefferson’s child doesn’t make it to college as a result. Mr. Johnson’s son becomes the head of a large corporation that hires Mr. Jefferson’s son and requires him to work in conditions that the young Mr. Jefferson would have never chosen for himself had he been able to afford different.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Oleena wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Oleena wrote:
And believe it or not, all joking and insults and such aside, you are making yourself look really dumb. Not with the the jabs and such - that can be fun and games - but with the ridiculous assertion that he hasn’t answered your questions. I know you’re not really interested in anything he has to say. You’re continuing to bait him just like you did with the quiz. And the baiting is no longer fun or interesting and it doesn’t stir up more valid debate; it’s just tedious yapping now. You know, the kind of tedious yapping that back in the Middle Ages would’ve earned a woman a good whippin’?
It’s always a person’s choice whether or not to continue participating in discussion.
The guy has faithfully fetched every stick you’ve thrown. Thank him, why don’t you? Instead of accusing him of precisely the opposite of what he’s done. When you keep unduly yapping at him you really, really lose your credibility. Then you look like a snide little bitch. Was that your ultimate goal when you forayed into PWI? To make yourself out to be a snide little bitch? I think not. I can’t imagine that was really your intention so quit playing the part. I think you had honest intentions so just take this as corrective little slap.
[/quote]
This is a pointless argument because if you really believed that I had honest intentions you would also believe that I don’t feel he’s addressed the issues presented head on. However, because you share his vantage point you struggle with how his answers could possibly not have hit the questions he tried to answer on the head.
The fact that you two can’t see how several people on that thread still feel that the question regarding the reconcilliation of the bible’s description of god with it’s description of god’s omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent nature has not been answered in a logic fashion shows either a lack of understanding of the question or logic itself.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Oleena wrote:
And what of monopolies?
And now for the easy part:
There are no monopolies except for state created ones.[/quote]
What of the natural monopolies such as microsoft?
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Mr. Jefferson never finds out…[/quote]
Inconceivable. How does someone not know they were robbed unless they were too wealthy to know what they had – and even still it would be no different than if it had happened right now and no one found out.
If no one knows then nothing can be done no matter what. Knowledge of a fact is a precondition to being able to do anything about it, however…
If he did know about it he could hire a detective find some evidence and then take it to one of the many courts of law that would probably work off of competing insurances…
I really don’t know for sure nor can I speculate about it.