THE MEANING AND VALUE OF POWER

ABSTRACT

The subject of the article is the etymon (original meaning) of the concept of "power" and its synonyms - such as domination, rule, influence. The origin of terms denoting subjects of power is also revealed. The second part examines the value aspect of power, namely its meaning and significance. The author formulates as a goal the clarification of the origin of words related to power in the Russian language and borrowings accepted in Russian-language texts. There is also an intention to reveal the sources of formation of value attitudes and the significance of power for the individual and society. In the part of the science of the origin of words, the methods of hermeneutics and language reconstruction are used. In the part of the doctrine of values, the cultural method of identifying the social nature of the subject of research and dialectics are used, revealing the opposite but interrelated aspects of the problem.

Novelty is expressed in the use of the authors' own developments, both presented in publications and in their further development. The archetypes of basic concepts of politics, as well as the meaning and significance of political phenomena in the life of people and in the functioning of society are demonstrated. It is shown that power is a way of regulating social relations during the transition from patrimonial paternalism to truly cultural mechanisms of managing people's lives in a polis as a community of people not related by blood. In the axiological aspect, it is shown that power is a function of social support for the subject who articulates and promotes the interests of a social group, and the greater its strength and deeper its influence, the more fundamental and quantitatively powerful the social base on which it relies.

Conclusions: power as a phenomenon is reduced to the etymon "to rule", that is, to direct, to indicate the way, and the value of power is determined by the desire to overcome chaos and create order in people's actions.

АННОТАЦИЯ

Предметом статьи являются этимон (изначальный смысл) понятия «власть» и его синонимов – таких, как господство, правление, влияние. Также выявляется происхождение терминов, обозначающих субъекты власти. Во второй части рассматривается ценностный аспект власти, а именно ее смысл и значение. Автор формулирует в качестве цели выяснение происхождения слов, связанных с властью, в русском языке и заимствованиях, принятых в русскоязычных текстах. Также имеется интенция раскрыть источники формирования ценностного отношения и значимость власти для личности и общества. В части науки о происхождении слов применяются методы герменевтики и языковой реконструкции. В части учения о ценностях используются культурологический метод выявления социальной природы предмета исследования и диалектика, раскрывающая противоположные, но взаимосвязанные аспекты проблемы.

Новизна выражается в применении собственных разработок авторов как представленных в публикациях, так и в их дальнейшем развитии. Продемонстрированы архетипы базовых понятий политики, а также смысл и значение политических феноменов в жизнедеятельности людей и в функционировании социума. Показано, что власть есть способ упорядочения общественных отношений при переходе от родового патернализма к истинно культурным механизмам управления жизнью людей в полисе как сообществе людей, не связанных кровным родством. В аксиологическом аспекте показано, что власть есть функция социальной поддержки того субъекта, который артикулирует и продвигает интересы социальной группы, и тем больше его сила и глубже влияние, чем основательнее и количественно мощнее социальная база, на которую он опирается.

Выводы: власть как феномен сводится к этимону «править», то есть направлять, указывать путь, а ценность власти определяется стремлением к преодолению хаоса и созданию порядка в действиях людей.

Keywords: politics, power, direction, representation, personification.

Ключевые слова: политика, власть, правление, репрезентация, персонификация.

Introduction

The term "politics" (ancient Greek πολιτική - civil activity) is "a concept that includes issues and events of public life related to the functioning of the state. Its meaning goes back to the ancient Greek name for the city-state - πολις. Aristotle called the art of governing a city, regulating relations between people in civil society the word politeia, and Plato generally used the term cybernetics, borrowing the word from sailors who called the helmsman who controlled the stern oar and was responsible for the direction of the ship's course a cybernet." [11; 5, p. 139].

The need for the art of governing public life "arises precisely in cities during the transition from barbarism to civilization. The tribal community was governed by customs and traditions, rituals and taboos. In civil society, it is necessary to develop an order of relations between strangers. To do this, it is necessary to accept certain rules of behavior, which, by virtue of the dictate of power or by general consent, approval and voluntary submission, become laws and are formed into legal codes, sets of legal norms (from the Latin us, uridis - custom, law, legal)" [6, p. 50].

Materials.

The works of M. Weber [1] and R.B. Perry [20], published at the beginning of the last century, are considered classic in the interpretation of power. The ideas of the classics were developed by S. Lucas [19], N. Luhmann [8], C. Pierce [10]. The essence of values was studied by M.S. Kagan [4], N.O. Lossky [7], F. Tennis [12], M. Scheler [15], and the same R.B. Perry [20]. There are both articles [3; 6; 16; 17; 18] and major monographs on axiology, in particular, by the author [5].

Etymology of power.

The word power is a verbal noun - from the verb volodeti, to own. The meaning of the action is to manage, to rule, and this meaning is similar in origin to Plato's cybernetics - to control the stern oar on a ship. To rule in Russian means to turn the rudder of the boat in the right direction with your right hand. Volodeti means to control the situation and impose your will (veleti) despite the circumstances or resistance. Therefore, power is strength, might. In English, power is strength, and also rool - to rule, dominate, surpass. And in China, the chairman (sitting in front) Mao Zedong was called the Great Helmsman from the same etymon with an oar at the stern. By the way: the one sitting in front, the chairman, the president - is the one who rules, directs.

The most important element of the system of political relations in society is the State, literally in Russian – pravlenie (governance). Popular in modern social philosophy is the definition of M. Weber: "The state is a human community that claims a monopoly on legitimate physical violence within a certain area - geographical, demographic, economic." [1, p. 645].\ In turn, community (Gemeinschaft) is understood by F. Tönnies "... as a being or thing whose actions are united in their internal and external direction", while he considers society (Gesellschaft) as "an aggregate or mechanism based on convention (a form of general will, supported and preserved by everyone for their own benefit) and natural law." [12, p. 10].

The origin of the names of subjects of power, persons vested with power, is curious. In Ancient Greece, it was an archon, nomarch or navarch from the root arche - elder, as well as a strategist - foreseeing. In Persia, the provinces were ruled by satraps - representatives of the center, strangers and therefore unbiased to their subjects, just like in Ancient Rus', the посадник, initially representatives of the prince in certain towns appointed by the prince.

In Ancient Rome, it was the emperor (from the Latin imperativ - command, order), and the similar dictator (from the Latin dictum - I say, I order). When in medieval Europe, imitating Rome, they created empires, even the personal names of the rulers became household words. Thus, Charlemagne became the source of the title krown and korol’ (from the Latin karolus), from rool Roi in French, and the name Caesar began to be added to the proper name by all rulers, and the words kaesar, kaiser, tsar appeared.

The Vikings contributed to the terminology of governance. The author supports the following viewpoint. The leader of the squad among the Scandinavians was called konung, and from here came the English king, the Turkic konaz and the Russian knyas’ (prince).

Power is exercised by a person or body that has the right to do so. Those who have such a right are “classified according to the division of social subjects into physical and legal persons, and then the direct actions of physical persons, spontaneous or organized, rebellions and uprisings or coups and revolutions are essentially political actions. Whereas actions of legal persons, brought within the framework of the legal field, i.e. mediated by legal norms, written acts and regulations, officially adopted codes and publicly approved constitutions - parliamentary hearings, party congresses, election procedures or plebiscites and referendums - are legal actions.” [6, p. 51-52].

When the prince personally carries out justice, judges and orders - this is an expression of will as an expression of private opinion. In order to avoid arbitrariness as a biased decision, it is necessary to develop rules - typical actions that will be applied in a standard and impartial manner. "The absence of norms is lawlessness and chaos, undisguised violence and a bloody war of all against all. Therefore, people called great sages legislators who created codes of laws and thus brought peace and order into the lives of their fellow citizens. This is, for example, King Hammurabi in Sumer, Solon of Athens in Ancient Greece, Emperor Justinian in Ancient Rome, Prince Yaroslav the Wise in Kievan Rus." [5. p. 139].

When, instead of a private opinion, the prince transfers his right to an official, and the latter is obliged to judge according to the rule, then this will be correct, in other words, by right, in accordance with the rule, which is of a necessary nature, since in this situation he is not an individual, but a legal entity, which only implements the established order.

“You can’t live without rules. Let’s say you and I are sitting down to play chess. We’ve played the opening, and I suddenly declare that from the next move the chess knight will move not in the shape of the letter “L”, but in the shape of the letter “W”. With a heavy heart – after all, the position is prepared for an attack – you agree. We’ve played the middlegame, and I again insist that from now on the chess knight will move in the shape of the letter “M”. If you rake the pieces off the board and throw them in my face – you will be right. You can’t play like that! The rules must be agreed upon “on the shore” and followed from the beginning to the end of the game.” [5, p. 140].

Axiology of power.

Power is social dominance (from the Latin dominare – to prevail), and therefore it is a value. In general, value is a human dimension of social phenomena in which the cultural essence of the products of human activity is manifested. The principle is that a person cannot treat everything that he has created dispassionately and indifferently. A person treats his creations as brainchildren in which he sees himself, his continuation and embodiment. Any product of labor has a greater significance for a person, the more of himself, his strength, time, talent he has invested in this product.

As a definition of values, the following position can be formulated: "value is a measure of the expenditure of physical or spiritual strength of a person on the creation or development of elements of the natural or social environment”. In natural objects and in cultural products I see my own face as in a mirror, but I cannot treat my dear self dispassionately: it is myself, depending on the circumstances, that I love or hate, approve of or blame, admire myself or turn away from myself.”[5, p. 80].

In application to power, two circumstances are of decisive importance. Due to the fact that “power as a social role is a secondary and transformed form of personality, it represents, substitutes for and presents one, several or many personalities. Representation (from the Latin representatia – new presentation) is a demonstration of a thing or personality in some form of secondary objectivity: not in one’s own, but in another incarnation, literally in someone else’s body. Since the Russian word “presentation” has several meanings (literally: to put in front of someone – demonstration, spectacle, show, idea, concept, understanding), then when it comes to the presentation of one object through another, in modern Russian the Latin word “representation” is often used as a word with a more specific meaning.” [6, p. 51-52].

"A lawyer represents his client in court; a delegate represents his team at a meeting or congress, having entrusted him to act "on behalf of and on behalf of"; a deputy represents the residents of his district at an assembly; the president is a popularly elected spokesman for the needs and aspirations of the country's citizens. When we cast our vote for one candidate or another at an election, the meaning of this procedure is literal: we will remain silent from now on, and our deputy, if he is elected and represents us in the legislative body, speaks for us, which means that we all speak with his voice, he is our personification. At least, that is how it should be in theory."[5, p. 141].

The phenomenon of representation is dialectically accompanied by its reverse side - the personification of a social role. “Personification (from the Latin persona – face, and facio – I do) prosopopoeia, anthropopathism (from the Greek ανθρωπος – man, and πάθος – feeling) – the representation of natural phenomena and forces, objects, abstract concepts in the form of characters, including the likeness of a person, or the recognition of human properties in them; attributing the properties of the human psyche to objects and phenomena of the real or fictional world.” [5, p. 142; 6, p. 51-52].

The performer of this or that social role, occupying some position, being nominated for this or that post, being endowed with some dignity, rank or degree and title, not only voluntarily, but also by necessity identifies himself and his social position. And then “the chairman of the board of directors sincerely says “my company”, and the administrator – “my district”. The mayor expresses and implements the needs of the development of his city, and then we see what he is more inclined to: to build a metro or to erect bridges. A diplomat, minister of foreign affairs or president, speaking at an international forum, [may – our clarification] say: “Russia is against... Russia believes...”” [9, p. 193 - 196].

“This is not just personification as a figure of language. This is the personification of a social role - "a source of influence, charisma (charm) of a political leader or statesman, colored with bright colors of originality and attractive force of personality of the performer of a social role, since a politician, like an actor, can be talented or untalented. At the same time, a brilliant actor is powerless if he does not rely on a social base - a mass of people who invisibly stand behind him and on whose behalf he speaks and on whose support he relies." [5, p. 141-142]. Power is how many and how influential people are invisibly standing behind their representative.

Institutions (from the Latin institutum - establishment, institution) are organizational forms of social life, a set of social roles as matrices of human behavior, where these roles are presented as transformed, transformed into a secondary product people. And a person as a legal entity does not behave as he wants, but as prescribed. This is a social role, and it is alienated from the personal properties of the individual, dominates the performer. "He feels himself not a creator and the highest governing authority, but a servant of the Golem, made by his hands. The more powerful and grandiose the forces he releases, the more powerless he feels as a human being. He opposes himself and his own forces, embodied in the things he created and alienated from him. He no longer belongs to himself, but is in the power of his own creation. He built a golden calf and said: these are your gods who brought you out of Egypt."[14, p. 129]. Power in general is precisely an institutional value.

The meaning of a social role is determined by what we can get from its performer. What exactly depends on this or that official, what and whom he can influence. Social roles, such as: positions, degrees, titles, statuses, ranks already in themselves constitute a hierarchy in which we look for the level of competence we need in order to receive a certain service: state, expert, legal, intellectual or any other. The higher the status, the more visible the influence, power, authority of its bearer [6, p. 52].

Thus, it turns out that the direct dependence of the rank of a value, its significance in the existing hierarchy, its place in the subordination of goods is characteristic of the primary elements of society - people and things, and it is determined by the measure of costs for their production. Whereas the inverse dependence takes place for secondary elements of society, transformed forms of people - social roles in institutions, and transformed forms of things - signs and images in the form of ideas and ideals, and it is determined by the measure of costs for their consumption [5, p. 100].

Values are ranked by levels - higher or lower. A hierarchy (Greek ἱεραρχία, literally - hierarchy) should be built in relation to competencies, the arrangement of parts or elements of the whole in order from the highest to the lowest, a ladder of successively subordinate steps on which values ​​are located, and we should talk about the principle of their alienability from the social subject. This principle has the meaning that any value in the process of integration must remain within reach, that is, it must not go beyond the horizon of the subject’s activity and become completely external to him, and therefore alienated and therefore hostile.

"Only those values ​​that cannot be created or mastered by a given subject without interaction with other subjects must be brought to a higher level. Everything that a subject can handle on his own, he is not obliged to delegate to integrated forms, and if such delegation is required, he must regard it as violence. Even peace and well-being cannot be imposed by brute force, just as it is problematic to create a loving family by imprisoning a man and a woman in a prison cell." [5, p. 148].

Conclusion

So, we have found out that the term power in its origin in many languages goes back to the etymon "to lead", "to rule". Possession is influence, force, persuasion or coercion to follow the chosen path and fulfill the will of the leader leading the way. The function of the ruler is a social role, which, as a product of the expended efforts of the performer and the people behind him, is a value, and therefore attracts attention and evokes a passionate, emotional attitude. The leader as the spokesman for the interests of a social group represents this group and personifies in his own person a multitude of people, on behalf of whom and instead of whom he acquires status, social position. At the same time, power is alienated from its source and acquires its own significance, dominating the social base that gave birth to it.

References:

1. Veber, M. Izbrannye proizvedeniya [Selected Works] / M. Weber. – M .: Progress, 1990. – 808 p. [In Rus]
2. Ershov, Yu.G. Chelovek. Sotsium. Istoriya (Man. Society. History). / Yu. G. Ershov. – Sverdlovsk: Publishing house of Ural State University,1990. – 189 p. [In Rus]
3. Zinchenko, V. P. Tsennosti v strukture soznaniya (Values ​​in the structure of consciousness) / V.P. Zinchenko // Questions of Philosophy. – 2 011. – N o. 8. – P. 85 - 97. [In Rus]
4. Kagan, M. S. Filosofskaya teoriya tsennosti (Philosophical theory of value) / M.S. Kagan. – St. Petersburg: Science, 1997. – 116 p. [In Rus]
5. Kryukov, V.V. Summa aksiologii : monografiya (Sum of Axeology) / V.V. Kryukov. – Novosibirsk: Publishing house of NSTU, 2018. – 207 p. [In Rus]
6. Kryukov, V.V. Bazovye politicheskie tsennosti (Basic Political Values) / V.V. Kryukov // National Association of Scientists (NAU) – 2021. – No. 71, – p. 49 – 52. [In Rus]
7. Losskii, N. O. Tsennost' i Bytie (Value and Being) / N.O. Losskii. – Moscow: AST, 2000. – 733 p.
8. Luman, N. Vlast' (Power) / N. Luman. – Moscow: Praxis, 2001. – 266 p. [In Rus]
9. Mel'nikov M.V. Privatnoe i publichnoe v istoricheskom protsesse. Teoretiko-sotsiologicheskii analiz : monografiya (Private and Public in the Historical Process. Theoretical and Sociological Analysis: Monograph) / M.V. Melnikov. – Novosibirsk: NSTU Publishing House, 2016. – 396 p. [In Rus]
10. Pirs, Ch. S. Ikona, indeks, simvol (Icon, Index, Symbol) / Ch. S. Pirs. – M.: Logos, 2000. – 448 p. [In Rus]
11. Platon. Dialogi (Dialogues) / Plato. – M.: Mysl, 1986. – 607 p. [In Rus]
12. Tennis, F. Obshchnost' i obshchestvo: osnovnye ponyatiya chistoi sotsiologii (Community and Society: Basic Concepts of Pure Sociology) / F. Tönnies. – St. Petersburg: Vladimir Dal, 2002. – 450 p. [In Rus]
13. Ugrovatov, A. P. Politologiya: Slovar'-spravochnik (Political Science: Dictionary and Reference) / A.P. Ugrovatov. – Novosibirsk: UKEA, 2006. – 486 p. [In Rus]
14. Fromm, E. Zdorovoe obshchestvo. Dogmat o Khriste (Healthy Society. Dogma of Christ) / E. Fromm. – M.: ACE: Transitkniga, 2005. – 571 p. [In Rus]
15. Sheler M. Izbrannye proizvedeniya (Selected Works) / M. Sheler. – M.: Gnosis, 1994. – 413 p. [In Rus]
16. Kryukov, V. The Phenomenon of Values in the Axiology and in the History / V. Kryukov // International Journal of Management Science and Business Administration. – Volume 7, Issue 2, January 2021, Pages 7-13.  [In Eng]
17. Kryukov, V. Basic Concepts of Political Axiology / V. Kryukov // International Journal of Management Sciences and Business Research, Sep-2021 Vol-10, Issue 9. – p. 15-18.  [In Eng]
18. Kryukov, V. Concepts of Political Axiology / V. Kryukov // Proceedings of the International Conference “Process Management and Scientific Developments” (Birmingham, United Kingdom, September 1, 2021). – p. 123-128. [In Eng]
19. Lukes, Steven (2021). Power: A Radical View / S. Lukes. – London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2021. – 244. [In Eng]
20. Perry, R. B. General Theory of Values / R.B. Perry. – N.-Y., 1926.  –    589 p. [In Eng]