"ZerkonX"
X.net> wrote in message news:pan.2008.09.11.15.56.25@X.net...
> On Thu, 11 Sep 2008 11:50:22 +1000, Sean wrote:
>
>
>> Seems we are on opposite ends of a circle, never to meet. ;-)
>
> Agree
>
>> I accept what you are saying Z ..... I believe I understand you. Maybe
>> we're splitting hairs, or have a semantics problem, or just coming at
>> your subkect from slightly different positions and therefore "looking"
>> at it differently, yet fundamentally agree if we could find a way to
>> articulate that to each others satisfaction/experience.
>
> Actually this was meant to split hairs I thought needed splitting, or I
> thought would be amusing to split ore like. Knowledge, today being so
> accessible, seems to have instilled a certain type of 'computer room
> arrogance'.
>
>>
>> Power is powerless unless there is a foundational structure, and
>> institution, through which it flows.
>
> I can not get past 'power is powerless'.. maybe 'power is immediately
> diffused'? So, power needs conductive circuitry (structure).. how to yank
> this out of the metaphor?
>
> In an intentional act, a result of failure or success would be
> completion. Action being structured by intention. Institution being its
> completion or result.
>
> If you mean 'structure' as a value and 'institution' as meaning an
> outside assistant... well, is this sort of what you are getting at?
>
>
>
No not really, more in a very practical sense.
example .... from his personally held knowledge Gates created MS-DOS. That
s'ware program had the power to do things with a hodge podge of available
hardware that many other programs could also do at that time by other's
personal knowledge , but using different s'ware approaches.
But it looks to me that Gates also had an added level of knowledge [ be it
experience or intuition or vision ] and that was about how to write a damn
good contract. As well has how to create Microsoft to become a giant.
Now other people had similar knowledge to Gates, but they were not able to
create the structures [ contracts ] or the insititutions [ his MS business
model ] . Further, gates seems have been able to to Negotiate with existing
strutcures and institutions like IBM, as well as Banks & Government to get
the most advantageous circumstances for himself, and his staff, and later
Customers and Shareholders.
But, and I think this is generally agreed today, that at the time MS-DOS was
in fact the not the best software of it type .... what catipulted Gates into
a position of immense power .... was the structures and instituitions he
created, through which the power of his knowledge about computer software
could be maximised to great effect.
Another colorary would be, an indiviual may in fact be the most qualified
person on the planet to be US president at a particular point in time. He
may have enormous knowledge/wisdom/skills/talent ..... but no money, and no
political party to promote him.
So there are two examples of original personal potential "power" ..... but
it that needs appropriate structures and an Institution/s in order for it to
be channelled, and "protected" from attack, or being over powered by
existing power bases/institutions.
Same goes for Religion .... many gurus/saints, only a few religions have
survived the genesis of the originator.
Look at jesus ... as an individual he was able to be killed. he had
followers but they didn;t get very far against the Roman and jewish power
bases. Along came St Paul decades later, and he was the one who created the
original network & structure of Christianity on a practical sense for it to
survive, and that included going underground in the catecombs.
It was still fledging though, untill Constantine, emperor of Rome, and soon
after the Council of Nicea before Christianity established it current
structure and institituions. That is why it has survived, because that
Institutuion became the most powerful on earth for a very very long time in
an economic, scientific, and political sense ..... nothing to do with
"spirituality or beliefs".
The flip to this is ..... using gates, that just making structures and
institutions isn't enough .... his personal primary knowledge, and how that
grew over time with many helpers was still critical. Just having the
Instituion of itself isn't power .... it must have a "creator/genesis"
behind it and that of itself is basically knowledge.
Hope that's clearer, even if you don;t agree, that what's i think makes it
all work. I think history proves this repeatedly if one looks at it.
ok thx