2. Michel Foucault The understanding of individual choices in a Foucauldian sense is deeply rooted in his deterministic approach to the will to power and truth. His premises are underscored by the belief that all human beings are individualized as individuals of a particular kind. For Foucault (1979), this form of individualization is done through various practices that seem perfect and refined yet serving a normalizing and individualizing function that produces us as subjects that are inevitably subjected into forms of domination, with an effort of leading us into docility of our practical lives. Two techniques are present in individuals as they seek to understand and control themselves: Technologies of self and Technologies of domination. …show more content…
18), with an intention of reconstructing and transforming themselves so as to attain a certain state of wisdom, perfection, purity, and even happiness. In other words, it is a kind of disposition that inclines one to do something they believe would bring them success. For example, as a student, I will pursue a certain behavior or classes with a conviction that it will be rewarding at some point. Second, 'technology of domination' seeks to define and control the conduct of individuals, submitting them through the exercise of disciplinary powers that leads them to docility (p. 18). The two types occur in settings where we identify ourselves as belonging, such as schools, work-places, families, organizations, religious groups, countries, …show more content…
Foucault would argue that everything that I hold dearly as 'my interests' arise from my typical physical, historical and philosophical orientations of my life. To substantiate this argument, Peters and Tesar (2016) would, therefore, argue that the choices I make are neither rooted in the state, my country, nor the ideologies which have been developed, rather my choices are rooted in how I become utilized by my "new" status to live, work, produce, consume, and sometimes die (p. 17). In short, all the interests I exhibit are a reflection of what Foucault calls, "disciplinary
Ms. Pharr explains the politics of domination as few seeking to have power over the lives of many, gaining it through systems of oppression and exploitation. The politics of liberation, the goal is for the many to share decision-making, resources and responsibilities for the good of the group as well as the individual (pg. 11).
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977 (C. Gordon, Ed.). New York: Pantheon.
(Flynn 1996, 28) One important aspect of his analysis that distinguishes him from the predecessors is about power. According to Foucault, power is not one-centered, and one-sided which refers to a top to bottom imposition caused by political hierarchy. On the contrary, power is diffusive, which is assumed to be operate in micro-physics, should not be taken as a pejorative sense; contrarily it is a positive one as ‘every exercise of power is accompanied by or gives rise to resistance opens a space for possibility and freedom in any content’. (Flynn 1996, 35) Moreover, Foucault does not describe the power relation as one between the oppressor or the oppressed, rather he says that these power relations are interchangeable in different discourses. These power relations are infinite; therefore we cannot claim that there is an absolute oppressor or an absolute oppressed in these power relations.
...easily controls and manipulates the way individuals behave. Although there are no true discourses about what is normal or abnormal to do in society, people understand and believe these discourses to be true or false, and that way they are manipulated by powers. This sexual science is a form of disciplinary control that imprisons and keeps society under surveillance. It makes people feel someone is looking at them and internally become subjective to the rules and power of society. This is really the problem of living in modern society. In conclusion, people live in a society, which has created fear on people of society, that makes people feel and be responsible for their acts. Discourses are really a form in which power is exercised to discipline societies. Foucault’s argument claims discourses are a form of subjection, but this occurs externally not internally.
In Foucault’s analysis, the concept of Panopticon is developed based on the manipulation of knowledge and power as two coexisting events. He believes that knowledge is obtained through the process of observation and examination in a system of panopticon. This knowledge is then used to regulate the behaviors and conduct of others, creating an imbalance in power and authority. Not only can knowledge create power, power can also be used to define knowledge where the authority can create “truth”. This unbalance of knowledge and power then marks a loss of power for the ends being watched, resulting in an unconditional acceptance of regulations and normalization.
Golder, B. 2009. Foucault, anti-humanism and human rights. Published online by the Hawke Research Institute, University of South Australia, Underdale, SA, 2009.
Problems with Foucault: Historical accuracy (empiricism vs. Structuralism)-- Thought and discourse as reality? Can we derive intentions from the consequences of behavior? Is a society without social control possible?
“We are left alone, without excuse. This is what I mean when I say that man is condemned to be free” (Sartre 32). Radical freedom and responsibility is the central notion of Jean-Paul Sartre’s philosophy. However, Sartre himself raises objections about his philosophy, but he overcomes these obvious objections. In this paper I will argue that man creates their own essence through their choices and that our values and choices are important because they allow man to be free and create their own existence. I will first do this by explaining Jean-Paul Sartre’s quote, then by thoroughly stating Sartre’s theory, and then by opposing objections raised against Sartre’s theory.
Introduction Michel Foucault and Erving Goffman’s work was centralised around two different concepts of how your identity is formed through the process of power and expert knowledge. This Essay will discuss the ideas of Michel Foucault, a French Social Theorist. His theories addressed the relationship between power and knowledge and how both of these are used as a form of social control through society. The essay will look at Foucault’s work in The Body and Sexuality, Madness and Civilisation and Discipline and Punish, which displays how he conceptualised power and identity on a Marxist and macro basis of study. The Essay will also address the Ideas of Erving Goffman, a Canadian Born Sociologist who’s key study was what he termed as interactional order, that is how the functions of ritual and order of every individual member of society, in everyday life, interact to form social order.
Sarah Snyder Professor Feola Gov’t 416: Critical Theory Assignment #2 On Foucault, “Truth and Juridical Forms” Michel Foucault may be regarded as the most influential twentieth-century philosopher on the history of systems of thought. His theories focus on the relationship between power and knowledge, and how such may be used as a form of social control through institutions in society. In “Truth and Juridical Forms,” Foucault addresses the development of the nineteenth-century penal regime, which completely transformed the operation of the traditional penal justice system.
“Power is exercised only over free subjects, and only insofar as they are free. By this we mean individual or collective subjects who are faced with a field of possibilities in which several ways of behaving, several reactions and diverse compartments may be realized.” (Foucault)
In the essay “The Politics of Truth”, Michel Foucault examines what critique is. Foucault begins his explanation of critique by relating it to Immanuel Kant’s definition of enlightenment. In the essay “What is Enlightenment” Kant argues that society has developed an “immaturity” that relies on the direction of authority. Kant states “If I have a book to serve as my understanding, a pastor to serve as my conscience, a physician to determine my diet for me, and so on, I need to exert myself at all” (3). Kant believes that this “immaturity” leads to society being constrained. Kant believes that “the public’s use of one’s own reason must always be free, and it alone can bring about enlightenment” (4). Kant provides an example of a tax payer who pays his taxes but questions them as well. Kant states that the taxpayer “[civic duty is to] publicly express his thoughts regarding the impropriety or even injustice of such taxes” (5). In Kant’s example, a connection can be made to Foucault’s argument “what is critique?” Foucault’s examination of critique begins with his question “how to be governed like that” (44)? Foucault uses this question and its connection to Kant’s “Enlightenment” to critically look at the history of “power and knowledge”.
This essay will analyze and critique Michel Foucault’s (1984) essay The Use of Pleasure in order to reveal certain internal weaknesses it contains and propose modifications that would strengthen his reading of sexuality as a domain of moral self-formation. In order to do so, it will present a threefold critique of his work. Firstly, it will argue that that his focus on solely the metric of pleasure divorced from its political manifestations underemphasizes state power as a structuring principle of sexuality. Secondly, it will posit that his attention to classical morality privileges written works by male elites and fails to account for the subtexts that would demonstrate other forms of morality. Finally, it will argue that the nature of actors’ resistance to moral codes, explicated through Butler’s concept of iterability and signification, is an important factor that should also be considered. As a result of this critique, this essay
This controversial view of discourse has evolved into a production through which passes under the representation of human phenomenon. And all of this is simply constructed by a class of designated people, that we like to call ‘experts’ attributing the power to give form and classify everyone’s reality. An example of this would perhaps be what we choose to see on media systems, censorship does not only concern what an individual can see but also what they can say or do. This overarching constriction Foucault identifies in our society proves us wrong to believe we are becoming freer as every day goes by.
In considering the prompt for Discussion Board 3 prior to reading, I felt I maintained an adequate study routine. Unfortunately, after my analysis was complete, I realized that I am significantly lacking in my ability to study in an effective manner. As a homeschooled student, I think this is an area that my educational experience lacked in. Additionally, having spoken with my mother, she too agreed and has profusely apologized for this deficiency. Prior to gaining a more in depth understanding of proper study skills through the text, mine were quite weak. To be honest, I read my class textbooks while highlighting key factors to include in my notes. Once reading was complete, I would put together an outline of the concepts which I had highlighted.