Terminology

Capacity: the ability to legally bind oneself (pejorative term)

Power: the ability to legally bind others (pejorative term)

Why use this pejorative term? Quite simply, it goes against all freedom. Freedom is being free, not binding oneself, or worse, being bound.

To bind (pejorative term): to prevent a person from moving and, more generally, from making decisions; in short, to hold them captive.

I. On the power to educate people:

Who holds this power: the elites, right?

Who are the elites? Contrary to popular belief, it's not just those with power, money, etc. This is a distorted image. So, those who educate the people are, unless I'm mistaken:

- Professors, teachers, instructors, and trainers

- Politicians: members of government, members of parliament, etc., with established rules

- Film producers, actors, and other screenwriters

- Authors of textbooks, novels, fiction, historical works, biographies, etc.

This list is certainly not exhaustive, but I think it provides a good overview of current events.

II. On the Power to Captivate or cap and Educate

I was wondering if we captivate or cap people and then educate them, or vice versa. If we take the example of birth, we are not born educated (although education occurs throughout childhood and then throughout life), so it is indeed captivation or capped (from the verb cap) that comes into play (for example, the State wants to educate children as it sees fit; it makes daycare compulsory from childhood, then compulsory schooling, or rather compulsory education).

We can therefore deduce that people begin by capturing or captivating individuals, then seek to educate them. This is also the meaning of colonization, expansionism, etc.

III. On the Nature of Individuals and the Person

We cannot claim to know the nature of individuals without individualizing them. However, "people" is simply a terminology that designates a more or less specifically designated group of people. We will not conduct a group analysis here; there are already many that analyze crowds and their movements. What about the individual, taken in isolation?

Survey systems are quite revealing, as they generally study individuals and therefore interview them in isolation in order to gain insight into their thinking. Elites therefore seek to know what individuals think, on the one hand, to better control them, and on the other, to meet their needs.

What's interesting is surveys that aim to question individuals about reprehensible acts: we see that each person interviewed has a notion of good, which is a good thing. What's good: simply "doing." What's not: "undoing." Undoubtedly, everyone understands these two notions, even a young child.

Solution IV

The advantage of the verbs "to do" and "to undo" is that in good French at school, we learn that they are all-purpose verbs: thus, "to undo" or "to destroy," "to steal," "to plunder," "to break," "to swindle," etc., are all synonyms punishable by law or legal norms. In this, I am not inventing anything other than the perfectly reducible common element: in short, in mathematics, we speak of x or the irreducible common element.

As for "making" something prettier, for me, it is a priori to build, erect, give, share, render, transport, finish, etc.

And here, it is up to the law or the elites (and therefore to those who have the power, and I mean power) to educate. So it's more of a responsibility, a fine responsibility in theory, while they see it more as a burden (in fact, they call it a public office, haha). They don't encourage or reward good behavior or good deeds among the population (except when they reward each other with their Order of Merit, Knight of Honor, Nobel Prize, etc.). Nothing, absolutely nothing, no media outlet to relay any of this, and that's it for them.

Author:

Vidal Bravo - Jandia Miguel

Engineer - Master II in Law

Paris II / Panthéon - Assas

UFR of Montpellier I - Center for Consumer Law