Tillich, Paul The Interpretation Of History (Existential Philosophy

[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]

power. But this possibility does not form a basis of the concept, but grows out of it. The
foundation of the concept of power lies in the structure of existence itself, and indeed of
human as well as pre-human existence.
Everything living, in an encounter, appears as a union of remaining within itself and
advancing beyond itself, for this is the very basis on which rests the possibility of any
encounter. The greater the strength to advance beyond itself without losing itself, the greater
is the might with which a living thing encounters; the greater is its spatial, temporal, and inner
tension. How great it is, is decided in the encounter itself, in the reciprocal advance and
retreat. One can interpret being as a constantly changing balance of mights in encounter;
indeed, one can say that this is the original conception of reality and that the abstract question
about being could arise only in a late period of history, as, e.g., in Greek philosophy.
This conclusion prompts the rejection of the positivistic concept of nature and man, insofar as
it appears as the only form of scientific observation and as it is also accepted uncritically by
Socialism. Instead, there exists the possibility of turning back to the dialectical principle,
which was effective in the social analyses of Marx. Dialectics also knows no objects whose
essence is fixed, but only functional relationships in which the meaning of every element
changes according to the moment of development. In dialectics, being is realized in social
tensions. Since, in the social tensions, universal, human, and natural tensions also take effect,
an analysis of society must not overlook them.
If all being is indeed a balance of tensions of might, then social being is a balance of tensions
of power. For power is might on the level of social existence. Might, as a general term
embracing nature and man, appears in the force of a wave rushing into the land and ebbing; as
well as in the unfolding strength of a tree, which overshadows others until it is itself
overshadowed; in the prominent position of an animal in the herd, which another will perhaps
soon contest; in the impression of the adult on the small child and the mutual dependence of
the adult on the child. Might belongs to everything that advances upon us, that gains
authority, that is dominant perhaps only to retreat the next instant and give way to
something more dominant. Our whole world of perception is built up thus, and this encounter
in mutual tension of might and impotence is the original being of things. On the social plane,
it is the same. Yet here a new factor is added: the balance of tensions of might is not
accomplished without consciousness and will. Social might proves itself in the successful
advance of one will against the other. He has power who can attain a balance in which he
retains the chance of accomplishing his will. How can such a balance be achieved in society?
Obviously not through one man threatening his fellow like a highwayman, forcing him to do
his will, but through society s creating definite positions of power and turning them over to
definite individuals. Power as a social phenomenon always depends on a position of power
recognized by society, on an institution in which society collects its intrinsic might and only
thus really constitutes itself. The might of a group can really only be born when the group
creates for itself an unified, advancing, and eventually retreating will. The institution in which
this happens is the sphere of power determined by the group. Only he who directly or
indirectly, openly or secretly is accepted in this sphere is in possession of social power.
The power, in which the group wins its might and this means its existence as a group is
always simultaneously the power of the group and power over the group. And does not exist
without the other. If it were not power over the group, then it would attain no unified
combination of individual will; therefore, no social existence. If it were not power of the
group, then the group would not have created the position of power which is the prerequisite
of all social power.
B. The structure of society
As a matter of principle, the position of power prepared by the group can be taken over by all [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]

Linki