Does knowledge give you power or fear?
Knowledge in general does not conclusively grant power or cause fear. What determines its effect is the content – what the information is about is directly related to the impact it has. If the knowledge is important and/or damaging, it can lead to an increase in power. If the information causes the informed to be in jeopardy or to become aware of their danger, it causes fear. Works of literature, alongside personal and political examples, demonstrate how knowledge can cause fear and bestow power – sometimes simultaneously.
When is knowledge power?
The popular phrase “knowledge is power” holds true, provided the information in question fulfills a set of specifications.
Option A:
- It must be negative information about someone.
- If the information were revealed, this someone would experience humiliation/embarrassment/danger/ punishment.
Option B:
- Someone/a group of people must be anxious to acquire the information.
When knowledge meets the conditions of either option A or B, it can bestow power on the informed, as was the case in Agatha Christie’s Death in the Clouds. In the novel, the informed character, a moneylender named Giselle Morisot, experienced great power from her information. Indeed, she literally informed her maid “knowledge is power” (Christie 128) after being triumphant from an altercation with one of her reluctant, impoverished clients. They had tried to avoid paying, but as she had researched their dark secrets, they felt they had no choice but to cough up. Her in-depth knowledge of her clients gave her immense power over them, and kept them in check.
Immense power was also granted to Zalachenko, a character from Stieg Larsson’s The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest. This informed character met Option B’s parameters, his political knowledge giving him vast influence over the Swedish government. As they desired to know his impressive database of parliamentary secrets, they constructed a whole new identity for Zalachenko, paying him and providing him with a home, a job, a full-time security force and constant bail-outs for his crimes.
Knowledge certainly was power for Giselle Moirsot and Zalachenko. But information doesn’t always have that impact on everyone.
When does knowledge result in fear?
Until a few weeks ago, I was under the impression that the neighborhood I lived in, Jardim Botancio, was a safe one. I felt comfortable walking around the local supermarkets, bookstores and restaurants, believing that the horror stories about Copacobana and the Favelas didn’t apply here. That was until I discovered alarming information - daylight robberies regularly took place on the main road twenty meters away from my home. The knowledge definitely didn’t give me a sense of power or strength; it had the opposite effect of inflicting fear and alarm. It took away my confidence to stroll around even in the daylight; I felt, and continue to feel, powerless against the dangers outside.
Gertrude Stein’s Reflection on the Atomic Bomb also notes how knowledge can result in alarm and fear. Her prose poem comments on how people were becoming increasingly anxious and frightened as they learned more and more about the Atomic Bomb. Her opinion – they shouldn’t care, they shouldn’t let the information bother them – was a particularly rare one, but possessed a grain of truth. Her argument was that they couldn’t do anything to change the situation; feeling frightened and alarmed was pointless. She ended her poem by stating, “everybody gets so much information all day long that they lose their common sense.” Her message was not untrue; the overdose of bomb-related information did make them lose their head, act flighty, anxious and fearful.
The conditions of fear-inducing knowledge:
Option C:
- Informed becomes aware of a danger they were previously unaware of, one that directly/indirectly affects them.
Option D:
- Informant, by merely knowing a certain fact, realizes they are now in jeopardy.
When does knowledge simultaneously grant power and cause fear?
When knowledge fulfills both Options A/B and C/D, the informed becomes simultaneously powerful and afraid. They are the possessor of sensitive, damaging information that someone wants, which puts them in a position of power. However, this knowledge may either cause them to feel fearful or to be in jeopardy. An excellent political example of this situation is the Witness Protection Program – the witnesses fulfill options A, B and D.
Members of the Witness Protection Program have extremely sensitive, extremely useful knowledge about criminals. They’ve witnessed drug transactions, robberies, felonies; they have a vast database that would cause criminals to be punished and the government to be successful. These two aspects of the knowledge fulfill both Option A and B. The useful information, however, comes with a catch – it is dangerous and fear inducing. Their knowledge, as stated in condition A, consists of details that could put criminals in jail. Out of retribution and self-protection, the criminals would go after the witnesses. This effect of the information is what causes extreme fear and alarm; the informant, merely by knowing, is in jeopardy.
Conclusion
Knowledge is capable of giving both power and fear. When Giselle Morisot and Zalachenko were well informed, they enjoyed vast power. Information had the opposite effect on me – I felt less comfortable, less confident and more scared in my own neighborhood. In the same way, the people mentioned in The Reflection of the Atomic Bomb experienced a dip in their common sense and a rise in their fear from being knowledgeable. The members of the Witness Protection Programs also felt a rise in their fear, but simultaneously experienced a growth in power. From all of these examples, it is clear that knowledge induces both power and fear.
When is knowledge power?
The popular phrase “knowledge is power” holds true, provided the information in question fulfills a set of specifications.
Option A:
- It must be negative information about someone.
- If the information were revealed, this someone would experience humiliation/embarrassment/danger/ punishment.
Option B:
- Someone/a group of people must be anxious to acquire the information.
When knowledge meets the conditions of either option A or B, it can bestow power on the informed, as was the case in Agatha Christie’s Death in the Clouds. In the novel, the informed character, a moneylender named Giselle Morisot, experienced great power from her information. Indeed, she literally informed her maid “knowledge is power” (Christie 128) after being triumphant from an altercation with one of her reluctant, impoverished clients. They had tried to avoid paying, but as she had researched their dark secrets, they felt they had no choice but to cough up. Her in-depth knowledge of her clients gave her immense power over them, and kept them in check.
Immense power was also granted to Zalachenko, a character from Stieg Larsson’s The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest. This informed character met Option B’s parameters, his political knowledge giving him vast influence over the Swedish government. As they desired to know his impressive database of parliamentary secrets, they constructed a whole new identity for Zalachenko, paying him and providing him with a home, a job, a full-time security force and constant bail-outs for his crimes.
Knowledge certainly was power for Giselle Moirsot and Zalachenko. But information doesn’t always have that impact on everyone.
When does knowledge result in fear?
Until a few weeks ago, I was under the impression that the neighborhood I lived in, Jardim Botancio, was a safe one. I felt comfortable walking around the local supermarkets, bookstores and restaurants, believing that the horror stories about Copacobana and the Favelas didn’t apply here. That was until I discovered alarming information - daylight robberies regularly took place on the main road twenty meters away from my home. The knowledge definitely didn’t give me a sense of power or strength; it had the opposite effect of inflicting fear and alarm. It took away my confidence to stroll around even in the daylight; I felt, and continue to feel, powerless against the dangers outside.
Gertrude Stein’s Reflection on the Atomic Bomb also notes how knowledge can result in alarm and fear. Her prose poem comments on how people were becoming increasingly anxious and frightened as they learned more and more about the Atomic Bomb. Her opinion – they shouldn’t care, they shouldn’t let the information bother them – was a particularly rare one, but possessed a grain of truth. Her argument was that they couldn’t do anything to change the situation; feeling frightened and alarmed was pointless. She ended her poem by stating, “everybody gets so much information all day long that they lose their common sense.” Her message was not untrue; the overdose of bomb-related information did make them lose their head, act flighty, anxious and fearful.
The conditions of fear-inducing knowledge:
Option C:
- Informed becomes aware of a danger they were previously unaware of, one that directly/indirectly affects them.
Option D:
- Informant, by merely knowing a certain fact, realizes they are now in jeopardy.
When does knowledge simultaneously grant power and cause fear?
When knowledge fulfills both Options A/B and C/D, the informed becomes simultaneously powerful and afraid. They are the possessor of sensitive, damaging information that someone wants, which puts them in a position of power. However, this knowledge may either cause them to feel fearful or to be in jeopardy. An excellent political example of this situation is the Witness Protection Program – the witnesses fulfill options A, B and D.
Members of the Witness Protection Program have extremely sensitive, extremely useful knowledge about criminals. They’ve witnessed drug transactions, robberies, felonies; they have a vast database that would cause criminals to be punished and the government to be successful. These two aspects of the knowledge fulfill both Option A and B. The useful information, however, comes with a catch – it is dangerous and fear inducing. Their knowledge, as stated in condition A, consists of details that could put criminals in jail. Out of retribution and self-protection, the criminals would go after the witnesses. This effect of the information is what causes extreme fear and alarm; the informant, merely by knowing, is in jeopardy.
Conclusion
Knowledge is capable of giving both power and fear. When Giselle Morisot and Zalachenko were well informed, they enjoyed vast power. Information had the opposite effect on me – I felt less comfortable, less confident and more scared in my own neighborhood. In the same way, the people mentioned in The Reflection of the Atomic Bomb experienced a dip in their common sense and a rise in their fear from being knowledgeable. The members of the Witness Protection Programs also felt a rise in their fear, but simultaneously experienced a growth in power. From all of these examples, it is clear that knowledge induces both power and fear.