Power. When we hear this word, we most often imagine some kind of political elite or oligarchs associated with it. Meanwhile, power is a concept very close to us, with which each of us deals almost from the first years of life. We show our power, openly or hidden, in our lives and are constantly faced with its manifestations addressed to us. Does a child's cry have power over its mother? Does a mother have power over her child? Do we have power over anyone? So who has power over whom and does this power really exist? Some people fight it, others strive for it. At the same time, sometimes we put enormous effort into it. We make sacrifices. And all for what? Based on my therapeutic experience, I will try to clarify some details of this issue. So that each reader can more clearly define the boundaries of their power. And also clearly see the consequences that he may face when trying to narrow or expand the boundaries of his power. So what is power? On the website wikipedia.org we can find the following definition: “Power is the opportunity and ability to exercise one’s will, to influence the activities and behavior of other people, even despite resistance.” What is power for you? If you have paper and a couple of minutes, try making a list for yourself: What is in your control? Based on the definition, it turns out that since we can influence the behavior of other people, even despite their resistance, then theoretically we can do anything. And then the list of our power often includes the results of activities in which other people are involved. For example, I may believe that it is in my power to: maintain or build a relationship with someone; make a parent, spouse or friend happy, and maybe all of them combined, etc. Maybe there are similar items on your list? But let's figure out whether such power exists at all. I would venture to say that there is no such form of power. It simply doesn't exist. “So what is there then?”, you may ask. I admit two forms of existence of “power”: social contract and management. A social contract is when I agree (or join an agreement) with any person or organization to perform some important function for me in exchange for the fulfillment of certain obligations on my part. This is the essence of state power when I trust the state to provide me some personal security, as well as regulation of various processes in society in exchange for certain tax payments on my part and compliance with the laws and regulations established in this state. This is the same essence of employer power when our relationship is determined by an oral or written agreement. But by and large, an agreement is an agreement and there is no Power here. The second form of “power” I have identified is management. What is meant here? Knowing some physical, biological, psychological and other laws of nature, we can, with varying degrees of probability, predict the events of our world. Based on this knowledge and taking certain actions, we can reasonably expect that we will get the result we need. The easiest way to understand this is through knowledge of the laws of physics. For example, if you place a modern man with a box of matches a couple of thousand years ago, he could well pass for the Lord of Fire. But you and I know that he has no actual power over fire. He simply uses the laws of nature, completely beyond his control, for the purposes he needs. Knowledge and use of more complex laws, mainly from sociology and psychology, often creates in us the illusion of Power. It is as if one person actually has power over the decisions of another. But if we take a closer look, in any example we will find specific actions that, due to one or another chain of patterns, lead (and often do not lead) to a given result. And what happens? It turns out that the only power we have in our world is power overyourself. And then to a very limited extent. Problems begin when a person begins to act based on the belief that he has the Power to influence another. Moreover, in contrast to the above-mentioned version of “control,” a powerful person proceeds from the firm conviction that “HE can influence another.” What is the fundamental difference? If in the “control” option we clearly realize that our power ends in our actions, and the result depends on the laws of nature or the personal properties of another person beyond our control, then in the “possession of power” option we mentally exclude the role of nature and personality that we are trying to play. influence. Thus, we fall into an illusion in which, when performing some actions, we supposedly have power over the result. Here the trap slams shut and a person becomes a hostage to his own power. Depending on personal characteristics, a powerful person becomes dependent on his illusion in various ways. Most often, this addiction is associated with a feeling of guilt. Firstly, the more powerful a person is, the harder he experiences failures. It is impossible to forgive yourself for failure if the result is entirely in your control. Sometimes it reaches the point of absurdity: such a person is inclined to take responsibility even in those matters where his role is very episodic. Here I would like to note that the topic of responsibility and its boundaries goes side by side with the topic of authority, and we will return to this later. Moreover, since such a person claims responsibility that does not belong to him, he is doomed to constantly face reality in the form of failures and failures, which means suffering again and again. A powerful person is very greedy in dividing responsibility. It is very difficult for such a person to trust others to do anything on their own. He tries to get involved in everything and everywhere. And naturally, this leads him to the second probable problem - overwork and constant overload. The third possible consequence is that a powerful person will almost certainly be included in a triangular relationship (Karpman’s triangle) “Savior” - “Victim” - “Persecutor (villain).” The development of events in this vicious triangle usually follows approximately the following plot: Act 1: The “Victim” is looking for a “Savior”, to whom he is trying to shift responsibility for solving his problems. If the “Victim” succeeds, then the trap has slammed shut - a triangle has formed. Act 2: The “Victim,” whose problems are not being solved, turns into a “Persecutor” and begins to look for those responsible for the fact that life has not gone well. The culprit, of course, turns out to be the former “Savior”, on whom the anger and attacks of the former “Victim” fall. Act 3: The former “Savior”, who became the “Victim”, wonders how he ended up being the scapegoat in this situation. And then become an aggressor and a pursuer, changing different roles until he switches out of the triangle... A powerful person often enters into these relationships with the noble role of the “Savior”, because at first he sincerely believes that the “Victim” needs to be saved and saved she is in his power. The true need of the “Victim” is in the very process of being saved, and not as a result. And in this situation, the desire of the “Victim” to give responsibility for his salvation is “harmoniously” combined with the desire of the powerful person to possess this responsibility and power. And naturally, in this triangle, the powerful person is again doomed to suffering, torn apart by conflicting feelings of guilt and anger. Because saving the victim is not in his power. It is clear that, as a rule, it is extremely difficult for a person in power to agree with such a statement. Moreover, the victim actively feeds his illusions of power by willingly giving him responsibility for his salvation. So where is the way out? What to do and what to do if I want to break the vicious triangle, stop exhausting myself and get rid of excessive feelings of guilt. The answer, oddly enough (and perhaps quite logically), is at the other pole from power - in powerlessness. Let's go back to the picture here,