Power is not a means, it is an end.

Thank you for your responses LaughingHyena, Now I will finish up rebuttals, and I will close with a finishing arguement. "One could argue that this feeling of security is a form of power"power over danger and the like"but overlooks that natural dichotomies between multivariate human psychologies." I would argue that all people are the same. We are driven by primal instincts, to survive, to pass on our genes, etc. why would it be so strange to assume that a consumptive drive for power is not a drive of the inner most instincts of the human body? Perhaps because we have evolved beyond other creatures, and need something greater to aspire to, maybe this is why we could develop a need to obtain power. "An act of generosity to a stranger you'll never meet has no direct benefit to yourself, but can be explained as logical attachment to a personal ideal (a drive other than, and at times opposed to, personal gain.)" Even this is driven by a need for power, but just a different kind. Everyone wants to be remembered for their kindness dont they? If they are, then they are filling a need to be guaranteed immortality of a sort through the memories of others. Even if this is untrue, consider another end of power. Power for ones species, this guarantees that your own species will survive and thrive, therefore guaranteeing your species power and immortality as a collective. This is similiar to nationalists, who guarantee power as a collective nation. "If it were the case that people only had sex strictly from a desire to procreate, then there would be no need of birth control and abortion." But the pleasure comes from the primal need to procreate. The only reason pleasure exists in sex is so that we have more of an attraction to each other and have sex more often. As I explained in earlier debates, I said how the need for procreation results in power as an end. "I think we can also agree that the vast stockpile of theoretical knowledge accumulated over a lifetime does not match this description." Actually, I have a different idea anout theoretical knowledge. it is simply like a gold mine that may or may not actually contain gold, but if it does the person becomes rich. In this way theoretical knowledge, and the drive to obtain it, is driven by a desire for power. In this way, theoretical knowledge if proven would be as powerful if not more as practical knowledge. "and we can't therefore impose a single universal constant of a simple urge for power on all humans." People exist who starve themselves for various reasons, despite this people still say that humans have a desire to eat and survive. "7. Finally, while I believe that money can occasionally buy happiness, it has been noted that many people in wealthier and more powerful countries sometimes exhibit higher rates of depression and unhappiness (http://articles.latimes.com......), when by all accounts they should be happier, given broad-based superiority in all avenues of power, and increased likelihood of achieving it. Attaining the sole purpose of our desires is what creates fulfillment and long-term happiness, and if it's true that all purpose can be reduced to power, then people with less of it should by no means be more fulfilled." Whether a person is happy or not when obtaining power is irrelevant, they still have the drive to get power. Whether this fulfills them or not I dont knkw, but it is a primeval urge, and one that people strive for. Now I will begin my closing arguement. Every human is not different. Our own genetics are what controls us, and we all still share a drive for aspirations, and in my case I was arguing that power is one of these. So this means that power is a drive, like sleeping, and eating, that is ingrained in ourselves. People truly arent very different, you just have to see that we are simply the sum of our urges, desires, and lusts. Hank you for this debate, it has been a pleasure.