Re: Re: Re: Re: Question about the economics of information

["Ian Murray" <seamus2001@xxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carrol Cox" <cbcox@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 2:48 PM
>Subject: [PEN-L:26258] Re: Re: Re: Question about the economics of
information


>
>
> Ian Murray wrote:
> >
> > >
> > If knowledge is power which it is,
>
> _Some_ knowledge, _some_ times, held by _some_ people under _some_
> conditions is an element, probably an essential element, in power. But
> the cliche that Knowledge is Power in the abstract is usually trivial
> and when not trivial, false.

===============

That depends on which theorization of power you're talking about.

Musts for Marxians:

"The Circular Structure of Power" by Torben Dyrberg

"Knowledge and Power: Towards a Political Philosophy of Science" by
Joseph Rouse

They demonstrate quite convincingly that K is P is far from trivial.







>
> I know that I corrected a couple of  typos in the preceding paragraph.
> That knowledge could probably in some way be construed to constitute
> some sort of power -- but that would be trivial.
>
> My knowledge (or at least partial knowledge) of the _Grundrisse_
> potentially, but by no means necessarily, gives me the "power" to
> contribute to the formation of revolutionary thought in others, which
in
> turn, perhaps, will give them some power to contribute to a collective
> mass power. But we're stretching it.
>
> Carrol

=============

No that's precisely the microdynamics that build power as collective
action and it's a ubiquitous non-trival process.

Ian