Saying discharge here is nothing more than indicating the fact that everything has some causality and energy requirement for changing. If I want to move my arm up I need to have previously stored enough energy in my muscles etc. for that to “discharge” in the act of me raising my arm. What is really “discharging” is energy stored in chemical bonds within and between molecules, such as ATP, and biochemical processes cut the phosphate groups off which releases energy in a potent form, which then passes onto the amino acids and molecular structures nearby and catalyzes them to change, e.g. forming proteins or whatever, which sets off more cascading changes eventually leading to something like “my arm raises up in the air”.
Overly metaphysicizing this process is a bit silly. Discharge is an easy to understand concept once you grasp both the energetic and psychological corollary to that. There is ‘pressure’ in the mind, things that lead to catalyzing changes. Then those changes cause more changes, etc. Often the initial impetus is something experienced that touches upon a part of the neurological structure either housing remembered patterns or touching upon a part of the brain that is already designed to respond in a certain way when touched like that, for example by releasing certain hormones that go on to have many other effects.
Will to power is an overly simplified notion, but a useful one. It can be used in an explanatory manner up to a point, but then it breaks down and becomes inaccurate to reality. Self-valuing is a far superior concept thatn will to power, because as Fixed pointed out every instance of existing requires a huge number of negative valuations just to continue to exist. I negatively value walking into traffic, etc.
Discharge is a subset of the physical-chemical processes underling the body and mind. A surplus must exist, of energy, of sodium ions, whatever it is, for there to be an imbalance. This imbalance can then be activated to cause a change, which can be used to catalyze more changes in chain reactions. That is what we are talking about here. Will to power is the idea that Schopenhauer’s will to life is inadequate because not everything intends to live or even lives according to any such intentions toward living, also some thing choose not to live although Schop tried to spin that in a positive way for hits will to life theory, but anyway. Nietzsche noticed that in things like risk-taking we do not aim to live, we aim to increase power or at least experience power. Power is always relative to some domain in which it can be used or useful. There is no power as such. Will is just another word for intention. SO properly we are talking about intentions to gain specific kinds of powers useful or used in specific kinds of situations/contexts. But why would that even matter? It matters because self-valuing and values are always underlying this.
Intending to gain power in some area would not occur if not for the pre-existence of values, of valuing, and of the fact that the self/being is already always composed before hand of values and of valuings. And structured there by in such a way that its valuings and its values cluster around itself in a by, for, and of itself for its own sake. It acts as if it values its own valuing and as if its own valuing is of value, which of course it most certainly is.
Discharge/will to power occur higher orders up in the process, as specific values are valued. Will to power, so called, is merely the actual INTENTION to achieve values already being valued for some reason (context, etc. of the power-gain being intended) such as “I am hungry” and within that context I gain power by intending to acquire and consume foods. Discharge is then a secondary and more specific biochemical processes of unlocking previously stored energy at the molecular level in order to actualize the intended power-gain, which intended power-gain is itself only a secondary manifestation of the fact that a value is being valued.
No, look. When a mass of force of the intellect expends itself, that is an effusion of force. Accompanying this is the ‘escort appearance’ of willing, which is a pressing feeling, very agreeable—in other words, a pleasure (Lust!). And willing is not “willing-in-itself”, but willing-a-goal (willing-to-power). Goal setting and means and end thinking is willing-to-power, which is distinguished from “‘desiring’, striving, demanding” by the affect of commanding (WP 668; cf. BGE 19).
