More Subjects
Relationship Between Power And Knowledge By Paul-Michel Foucault
Student name
Submitted by
Assignment
Date
Relationship between power and knowledge by Paul-Michel Foucault
In political theory, the concept of power is one of the most discussed topics . There are many approaches to understanding the nature of power relations , with each focusing on his specific set of e elements inherent in power . It presented three different concepts, each of which supplemented the previous one and expanded the field of social relations in which you can was to detect manifestations of power and “Power Analytics” is no exception. At different stages of creativity, we can see different approaches to the description of power. At the archaeological stage, it was closely associated with discursive formations, which themselves create objects in the outside world that are subject to further study or other actions. In the genealogical period, the power is closely intertwined with the fabric of the social, imposing a network on the relations between people in society and not implying a possible exit from the limits of power. At the ethical stage, Foucault provides a more general view, he writes that “the government manifests itself in situations where some actions can structure the spectrum of possible other actions” (Foucault). .
It cannot be argued that Foucault radically changes his view of power. Nevertheless, the disclosure of various aspects of its manifestation makes a significant contribution to the understanding of the mechanisms of power functioning. In this chapter, we plan to examine various aspects of the concept of power-knowledge. In the first paragraph , a general approach to the definition of power-knowledge will be presented. Next, we consider the disciplinary and biopolitical manifestation of power. In the third paragraph of the paragraph, we consider self-care as a practice of self-control, and then we summarize the main points of the concept of power-knowledge, which are necessary for the subsequent analysis of everyday practices.
The relationship between power and knowledge
Before describing Foucault's logic to identify manifestations of disciplinary power and bio- power in modern society, it is necessary to reconstruct in a general way those methodological steps that led him to the possibility of raising the research question about these two aspects of power itself. Foucault himself clearly revealed the manifestations of power on the example of disciplinary practices and institutions (prisons, hospitals, schools, etc.). However, Foucault does not have the same detailed analysis of how power manifests itself in everyday life and in practice , when there is no open collision of norms. Such an analysis of everyday life would allow us to expand our understanding not only of how the subject is constructed in relationships, but also would bring clarity to the ways of maintaining the boundaries of the formed human subjectivity .
The archaeological period of Foucault's work was generally devoted to the study of discursive formations and the limits of various discourses , in particular the discourses of psychiatry and historical science. At the same time, he understood the discursive formations as a single “system of dispersion”, a pattern and order “between objects, types of utterances, concepts and thematic choices” (Foucault 564). In other words, discursive formations are a definite image of the representation of objects, which is internally homogeneous, i.e. such a representation image “places” objects into a single coordinate system. Such a system of coordinates within the discourse is recognized as truth , defined as “a set of techniques that allow each moment and each to make statements that will be considered as true” (Foucault 302). .
Using the archaeological method, Foucault traces the stages of consolidation of discursive formations in social institutions, economic processes and social relations . Thus, Foucault shows the process of how a certain idea of truth is fixed in social institutions through discourse and subsequently reproduced in society. The connection between the idea (or knowledge ) of truth and its reproduction is justified through power-knowledge.
Truth, according to Foucault, is closely connected with the relations of power that reproduce and support it. They broaden the presence of this truth in social relations and provide political intervention on “the reality that surrounds us and which is embedded in ourselves.”( Foucault 564). Truth as a definite knowledge tells us what is in reality, what is and what we should perceive as real. This vision is fixed at various institutions in the form of norms and values, which are then broadcast Xia people and provides them with a vision of reality that corresponds to a fundamental truth of discourse .
With the help of the genealogical method, Foucault showed how historically the institutions were formed that determine what is true and what is not. Such institutions, supported by scientific knowledge, had the ability to interpret the norm and non-norm , to determine the pattern of behavior or life that everyone should follow in society. “There is no power without a rational use of the discourse about truth, which manifests itself in power, comes from power and acts through it”(Foucault 775).Power consolidates knowledge of the truth in ourselves, so we become agents of power.
However, such knowledge of the truth is not something abstract, the truth is the knowledge of any phenomenon that is considered authentic. Knowledge of how to structure society, about the laws of nature, about the interpretation of justice or freedom, and about yourself, about your social roles, about your character and abilities can be true . “We are also subject to truth in the sense that it creates the law” (Foucault 777). According to which we build our behavior and perception of the world and ourselves in this world. Thus, power is inseparable from knowledge, since according to the knowledge of it we build our behavior, and knowledge itself is, is fixed with the help of the authorities in the various social institutions which reproduce it.
Foucault was not limited to the general definition of power, on the contrary, he argued that “power should be studied where ... it turns out to be embodied in real and effective forms of practice” (Foucault 238). In his works “To Supervise and Punish” and in the first volume of “The History of Sexuality”, Foucault analyzed the simultaneous appearance of the sciences of society and certain techniques of social management at the beginning of the 19th century. There is a strong connection between manifestations of power and knowledge, which consists in the fact that “ power and knowledge imply each other directly; that there is neither a relationship of authority without a corresponding education in the field of knowledge, nor knowledge that does not imply and together with it does not form a relationship of authority .
Power and knowledge mutually condition each other in the sense that they both present the world in a knowable and manageable form. Cognition is possible only to the extent that the authority has established a known object as an existing one . Object management is possible only because some knowledge of the managed object has been established.
Foucault does not fully identify power with knowledge, he points out that the same phenomenon has different properties and consequences in different planes of analysis. Separate consideration of the relations of power and the process of knowledge deliberately introduces a distinction between power and knowledge. The refusal of the approved assumptions of analysis allows Foucault to trace the connection between power and knowledge, between the production of objects and subjects of relations and their subsequent fixation in a system of knowledge that is recognized as true. Foucault dwells on the analysis of examples of power relations , highlighting two of their forms: disciplinary authority and bio-authority . Identifying the mechanisms of their functioning, he shows that knowledge constructs and reproduces the subject of relations
Conclusion
The concept of power-knowledge M. Foucault shows us the existence of a connection between two phenomena, which at first glance have no common basis. The usual ideas about power, formulated in the discussion about the “three persons of power”, are based on pre-postulated aspects, such as the presence of a conflict of interests, a negative characteristic of power, the existence of autonomous subjects or their “real interests” prior to the relationship itself.
The concept of power-knowledge Foucault allows you to look at the manifestations of power in relationships from a different perspective. In particular, we can observe how in modern society the process of disciplining a person, his normalization, the formation of a subject, which would be a participant in the relationship itself, takes place . The power here does not act as a thing belonging to someone; power is not sent from the center, be it a state or an autonomous subject. The government itself constructs the subject of relations, it forms knowledge about the person and the subject, and subsequently manifests itself through him.
We have shown that the analyst of power in its interweaving with knowledge is possible not only when examining disciplinary institutions and not only in cases where one norm is faced with another. Power can be observed in everyday life, in the non-probable human existence. In everyday life, according to M. Heidegger, we do not produce an analytical division of the world into its individual elements. We perceive the world as a whole, and ourselves as one of the phenomena in this world. We live in the usual way, we act according to the daily practices acquired in the process of socialization. In this paper, we have shown how power functions in everyday practices, namely, they revealed how power manifests itself, what qualities it has and what is the role of the subject in power relations in everyday life.
Work cited
Foucault, M. "The need to protect society." SPb.: Nauka (2005). 564
Foucault, Michel. "The subject and power." Critical inquiry 8.4 (1982): 777-795.
Foucault, Michel. Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977.
Vintage, 1980.238
Foucault, Michel. Politics, philosophy, culture: Interviews and other writings, 1977-1984.
Routledge, 2013
More Subjects
Join our mailing list
© All Rights Reserved 2024