{"id":107137,"date":"2018-03-12T12:00:30","date_gmt":"2018-03-12T12:00:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=107137"},"modified":"2018-04-14T17:58:13","modified_gmt":"2018-04-14T16:58:13","slug":"compassion-perspicacity-and-power","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2018\/03\/compassion-perspicacity-and-power\/","title":{"rendered":"Compassion, Perspicacity and Power"},"content":{"rendered":"

8 Mar 2018 – <\/em>The word compassion<\/em> conveys an extremely valuable human quality, but it also falls short in one key respect. One may feel compassion<\/em> for another person who is in pain or misery of some kind. The dictionary meaning of the words implies that one thereby \u201cfeels\u201d some of the other person\u2019s pain or misery.<\/p>\n

But a very basic question may bother us a little: What does a compassionate<\/em> person \u201cfeel\u201d when facing someone who is not<\/em> in overt pain or misery? Let us say the other person is happy, or resolute, or angry, or greedy \u2026 or whatever. Does the compassionate person then in fact \u201cfeel\u201d some of the other person\u2019s happiness, or resolve, or anger, or greed \u2026 or whatever?<\/p>\n

If he or she does so \u201cfeel\u201d, then would that quality also qualify as compassion<\/em>? No! \u2013 because compassion<\/em> refers specifically to feeling another person\u2019s pain<\/em> or misery<\/em>, not happiness<\/em>, or resolve<\/em>, or anger, or greed<\/em> \u2026 or whatever.<\/p>\n

Perhaps a more appropriate English word here would be sensitive<\/em>, with the meaning that a person \u201csenses\u201d another person\u2019s pain<\/em>, or misery<\/em>, or happiness<\/em>, or resolve<\/em>, or anger, or greed<\/em> \u2026 or whatever.<\/p>\n

However, the prevalent meaning of \u201cbeing sensitive\u201d implies that such a person also in fact exhibits a reaction<\/em> to what he or she senses<\/em>. Strictly speaking, though, \u201creacting to something\u201d is quite distinct from \u201csensing something\u201d. Surely, one may decide not<\/em> to react to something that is sensed quite clearly.<\/p>\n

So \u2013 if wish to we avoid using the word \u201csensitive\u201d \u2013 what do we call the quality of \u201csensing accurately but without any reaction whatsoever\u201d?<\/p>\n

The word perspicacity<\/em> refers to \u201cthe ability to see clearly\u201d. Here the verb \u201csee\u201d is understood to mean \u201csense\u201d as we have used that word above.<\/p>\n

With perspicacity<\/em>, we are in fact trying to get at the quality of \u201cdispassionate awareness\u201d \u2013 while opting to exclude any consideration of how one may or may not react<\/em> to what is observed. There are sound logical and practical reasons for making this distinction between \u201cbeing aware\u201d and \u201creacting\u201d.<\/p>\n

\u201cReacting\u201d \u2013 in one way or another \u2013 would generally be matter of a person\u2019s objective and policy, whereas \u201cbeing aware\u201d is a much more basic requirement. The distinction between them is similar to the distinction in medicine between diagnosis<\/em> and prescription<\/em>; the first is a prerequisite for the second.<\/p>\n

The author makes this confession without any hesitation: Most compassionate<\/em> acts performed by him in the absence of perspicacity<\/em> have yielded embarrassing outcomes! In fact \u2013 all said and done \u2013 greater perspicacity<\/em> seems to be the most valuable reward in the difficult journey of life!<\/p>\n

Perspicacity<\/em> requires a still mind; and clarity is lost instantly in an agitated mind. The common metaphor used in the so-called \u201cEastern traditions\u201d is that of being able to see a clear reflection in still water. A still but aware mind \u201creflects\u201d clearly the state of the surrounding \u2013 including any pain, misery, happiness, resolve, anger, greed \u2026 or whatever. This \u201creflecting\u201d is what we call \u201csensing\u201d.<\/p>\n

The difference between compassion<\/em> and perspicacity<\/em> can be brought out very well with the following simple examples.<\/p>\n

Imagine that a rich man and a poor man live on the two opposite sides of a street, in any city of your choice.<\/p>\n

The rich man may not feel compassion<\/em> for the poor man\u2019s condition; this would be quite a common situation. But the rich man may still be quite perspicacious<\/em> about the poor man\u2019s state of affairs.<\/p>\n

Similarly, the poor man would not normally feel compassion<\/em> for the rich man, unless the latter suffers from, say, an incurable disease or ungrateful and wanton wife or children. But the poor man can still be quite perspicacious<\/em> about the rich man\u2019s state of affairs, which may indeed be quite precarious.<\/p>\n

Whether and how the rich man or the poor man choose to react<\/em> to what each senses across the street is a different matter altogether. The basic quality of perspicacity<\/em> does not presuppose any reaction.<\/p>\n

Now consider another simple example.<\/p>\n

Suppose one sees a miserable man in India, and learns that alcohol has been a major cause of the man\u2019s extreme misery. An instinctive compassionate<\/em> response may be to offer some help, and perhaps even to rationalize that the poor fellow probably \u201cfell into the bad habit\u201d because he did not know any better.<\/p>\n

Perspicacity<\/em>, however, requires that the miserable man\u2019s responsibility towards his own life be also kept clearly in the mind. Without a firm commitment by the man to change his life for the better, a handout would be of limited help.<\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n

Having considered compassion<\/em> and perspicacity<\/em>, we now turn our attention to their nemesis \u2013 that is, power<\/em>.<\/p>\n

How exactly do we define power<\/em>?<\/p>\n

The original, simple meaning of power<\/em> refers merely to \u201cthe ability to do something\u201d. Electrical power, for example, is given as voltage<\/em> multiplied by current<\/em>, that being the amount of electrical energy available per unit time.<\/p>\n

However, modern life is dominated by large \u2013 or very large! \u2013 collectives<\/em> such as governments, corporations, social groupings, armed forces \u2026 et cetera<\/em>. A person may be born into a collective<\/em> (say a \u201ctribe\u201d), choose to join one, or may even be conscripted into one, as into an armed force.<\/p>\n

The operation of a large collective requires some unity of purpose <\/em>and discipline<\/em>. However, the qualities of unity of purpose<\/em> and discipline<\/em> are notoriously difficult to maintain among large collectives. Therefore subtle or overt coercion<\/em> is usually employed to achieve at least a semblance of unity of purpose<\/em> and discipline<\/em> in any large collective. Indeed, only the childishly na\u00efve would imagine that coercion<\/em> should never be necessary in maintaining a large collective.<\/p>\n

A hierarchy being an efficient principle of organization, the task of maintaining unity of purpose<\/em> and discipline<\/em> within the collective is given to an individual \u2013 or a small group \u2013 deemed to be \u201cat the top of the hierarchy\u201d. The necessary enabling mechanisms of coercion \u2013 both subtle and overt \u2013 are \u201clegally\u201d provided to the deemed \u201cleaders\u201d of the collective.<\/p>\n

Given this reality of collective life, power<\/em> has also come to mean \u201cthe right<\/em> to use coercion \u2013 or whatever else! \u2013 to achieve collective goals\u201d.<\/p>\n

In this context, a few important points should be noted.<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. The words \u201cnecessary enabling mechanisms\u201d<\/em> have been replaced by \u201cright\u201d<\/em>. With this change, power is seen as an end in itself \u2013 and various \u201cperks and privileges\u201d get attached to it. Individuals begin to covet power, and to compete and maneuver for power within the collective. Unity of purpose<\/em> and discipline<\/em> take a back seat \u2013 along with responsibility<\/em>, perspicacity<\/em> and compassion<\/em>!<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    When individual ambitions, prejudices and insecurities enter this \u201cheady mix\u201d, we generally see power<\/em> becoming a toxic rather than a beneficial quality. In such a situation, power<\/em> loses its necessary connection to responsibility.<\/p>\n

    An example will illustrate this point:<\/p>\n

    A global \u201cpower-monger\u201d of yore \u2013 who is now well past his \u201cuse by\u201d date \u2013 said once that power<\/em> was an aphrodisiac. That statement may well be a true reflection of fact. Given how \u201cpower-mongers\u201d operate, however, the statement may also have been a calculated boast, made for effect. In any case, the statement is surely a reflection of power losing its necessary connection to responsibility, as also of a conflation of the public and private aspects of the person\u2019s life.<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Collective goals begin to be proclaimed by so-called \u201cleaders\u201d, and the proclaimed goals may not even reflect the well-being of ordinary individuals. If this sounds incredible, the reader only has to examine closely the current goings-on within the huge collective known as the U.S. Government.<\/li>\n
    2. Increasingly, collectives around the world are contriving to get into strongly adversarial relationships with one another. In such situations, the \u201cleaders\u201d of collectives may end up buttressing each others\u2019 positions \u2013 even as they formally oppose each other! The configuration is akin to that of the various members of a mechanical structure, such as a truss, which oppose and buttress each other.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      In a lighter vein, we may say that the possibility of \u201cmutually assured destruction\u201d leads to the actuality of \u201cmutually assured power and perks for life\u201d!<\/p>\n

      ***<\/p>\n

      Coercion<\/em> implies the absence of compassion<\/em>, and usually also at least some lack of perspicacity<\/em>. \u201cLeaders\u201d and their \u201cinner circle\u201d tend to take the position that any feeling or view which is judged to be at variance with \u201ccollective goals and values\u201d needs to be suppressed \u2013 or even perhaps \u201crooted out\u201d.<\/p>\n

      Within an individual\u2019s psyche, power<\/em> generates ambition<\/em> and rapacity<\/em>. By their inherent nature, the qualities of ambition<\/em> and rapacity<\/em> know no bounds except those of death and crushing defeat. Till then, in the spirit of veni<\/em>, vidi<\/em>, vici<\/em>, \u201call that is seen must be conquered\u201d. From \u201cruling over\u201d one country, the ambitious and the rapacious begin to dream about \u201cruling over the whole world\u201d.<\/p>\n

      This is by no means a recent phenomenon. For example, Shah Jahan was a Mughal emperor whose name means \u201cLord of the world\u201d. And today\u2019s wannabe financial emperors dub themselves \u201cMasters of the Universe\u201d. In geopolitics, phrases such as \u201cleaders of the free world\u201d are bandied about; with the implicit assumption that these \u201cleaders\u201d will soon make the whole world \u201cfree\u201d!<\/p>\n

      Do the self-proclaimed \u201cleaders of the free world\u201d today know the true meaning of \u201cfreedom\u201d? Are they capable of knowing it?<\/p>\n

      The delusion of power<\/em> \u2013 like any other delusion \u2013 relies upon a selective and inaccurate grasp of reality. A kind of \u201cpathology of power\u201d follows inevitably, to which we may now turn our attention.<\/p>\n

      Lord Acton\u2019s observation is justifiably famous: Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.<\/em><\/p>\n

      Today we can adduce further evidence in support of Lord Acton\u2019s observation.<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. The Stanford Prison Experiment of 1971 provided eye-opening and conclusive evidence of the corrosive influence of power.<\/li>\n
      2. In the online edition of July\/August 2017, The Atlantic<\/em> magazine carries an article by Jerry Useem entitled Power Causes Brain Damage<\/em>. The report is based on recent research carried out using advanced medical imaging technology. A one-line summary of explains: How leaders lose mental capacities \u2014 most notably for reading other people \u2014 that were essential to their rise.<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        It may be noted that, in our terminology, \u201closing the mental capacity to read other people\u201d is nothing but \u201closs of perspicacity<\/em>\u201d.<\/p>\n

          \n
        1. Based on extensive study, the historian Arnold Toynbee famously concluded: Civil<\/em>ization<\/em>s die from suicide, not<\/em>by murder<\/em>. The fate of civilizations, he wrote, is determined by their responses to the challenges facing them. In the absence of a creative response to a new challenge, decline follows.<\/li>\n
        2. Nelson Mandela, in Conversations with Myself<\/em>, wrote:<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          … most successful men are prone to some form of vanity. There comes a stage in their lives when they consider it permissible to be egotistic and to brag to the public at large about their unique achievements.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

          Note<\/strong>: As an aside, the author would like to put forward this conjecture for the reader\u2019s consideration:<\/p>\n

          Many or even most of the modern symptoms of mental stress and illness are rooted in the unresolved conflicts between an individual\u2019s innermost instincts and the collective mechanisms of coercion \u2013 subtle or covert \u2013 that the individual may be facing in his or her daily life.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

          ***<\/p>\n

          \u201cCivilization\u201d, however it is defined, relies on perspicacity<\/em> and at least some degree of compassion<\/em>. The phrase \u201cruling over an empire\u201d seems to have a kind of seductive appeal to many \u2013 but surely any position which impacts the lives of millions of people also carries huge responsibility.<\/p>\n

          What do we see today?<\/p>\n

          Today we see \u201cconservatives\u201d competing with \u201cliberals\u201d to become the wielders of political power. On both sides, the lack of perspicacity<\/em> is conspicuous, while claims of compassion<\/em> are plentiful. Claims of compassion<\/em> are often made in the garb of \u201ctough love\u201d. The reality is that \u201ctough love\u201d is reserved for the weak \u2013 while \u201cnear and dear ones\u201d always receive a rather tender variety of love.<\/p>\n

          Experts debate whether we are in a \u201cunipolar\u201d or a \u201cmulti-polar\u201d world, and talk of \u201cideologies\u201d and \u201cspheres of influence\u201d. Does this terminology reflect anything new? Are we not really speaking again of \u201cempires\u201d? Are \u201cideologies\u201d anything more than sham intellectual \u201ccover\u201d for rapacious behavior?<\/p>\n

          There is nothing inherently good or evil about an \u201cempire\u201d. The test should be based on the well-being of people around the world. To achieve this well-being, any self-proclaimed \u201cemperors\u201d have to be perspicacious and sagacious.<\/p>\n

          In the absence of these qualities, we may well say: \u201cEmperors have never been more naked!<\/em>\u201d No doubt Saville Row and any number of fashion designers are ever at work \u201cclothing the modern emperors\u201d. However, any so-called \u201cemperor\u201d who is lacking in perspicacity<\/em> and sagacity<\/em> has no clothes.<\/p>\n

          Gautam Buddha lacked neither compassion<\/em> nor perspicacity<\/em> \u2013 and he turned his back on all forms of coercive power<\/em>. Does any person today, representing any so-called culture or civilization, ancient or modern, come even close?<\/p>\n

          Links to references and related articles by the author<\/em>:<\/p>\n

          Stanford Prison Experiment<\/a><\/p>\n

          Power Causes Brain Damage<\/a><\/p>\n

          What is freedom?<\/a><\/p>\n

          It\u2019s the Rapacity, Stupid!<\/a><\/p>\n

          Identity and Peace<\/a><\/p>\n

          _______________________________________<\/p>\n

          \"\"<\/a>Dr. Naresh Jotwani is a semi-retired academic living in India and a member of the TRANSCEND Network for Peace Development Environment<\/a>. Apart from part-time engagements in engineering education and consulting, he engages in an in-depth, personal exploration of how Gautam Buddha\u2019s profound discoveries and teachings can be applied to the acute problems of modern life.<\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

          \n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

          Coercion implies the absence of compassion, and usually also at least some lack of perspicacity. \u201cLeaders\u201d and their \u201cinner circle\u201d tend to take the position that any feeling or view which is judged to be at variance with \u201ccollective goals and values\u201d needs to be suppressed \u2013 or even perhaps \u201crooted out\u201d. Within an individual\u2019s psyche, power generates ambition and rapacity.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":106734,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[40,50],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-107137","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-transcend-members","category-analysis"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/107137","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=107137"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/107137\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/106734"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=107137"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=107137"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=107137"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}