HC Political Philosophy and Organ. Studies - PART 2, Emma Hamm 2078889
HC Political Philosophy and Organ.
Studies - PART 2
7. Michel Foucault on Power 2
8. Disciplinary Power 5
9. Neoliberalism 8
10. Expulsion 13
11. Contemporary issues: Post-Fordism 17
12. Contemporary issues: Econocracy 20
13. Platform Capitalism 25
, HC Political Philosophy and Organ. Studies - PART 2, Emma Hamm 2078889
7. Michel Foucault on Power
Critical theory
- Political philosophy as a branch of social philosophy
- Philosopher as cartographer
CRITICAL THEORY
Split in the tradition of political philosophy (see lecture 1)
→ Anglo-saxon normative theory (you suffer from conflicts of interests, so extract yourself from
society)
VS
→ continental critical theory (scaling up of question, what should WE as a society do?. Have critique
on the normative theory, because you are already in society / circle)
Start from non-ideal circumstances
● Presence of conflict: ‘politics is war through other means’ (Foucault)
Society; football match with 2 teams where no one sets the rules
engaging in conflict, but never becomes as intense as actual war (physical) - degree of
intensity, so not two completely different things as normative theory says. There is not a good
way of doing politics, because you always have a starting point in the debate (neutral position
not possible, as normative theorists argue).
● Political philosopher as cartographer of the present
→ Philosophy as ‘critique’
Mapping out the different conflicts. This is where the critique part comes from in philosophy
Critique of society at its present moment - what are the conditions where this idea comes from .
Bv; re-educating prisoners. How do we all have this idea? Because historically this wasn’t the case
- Conditions of possibilities
- Once you have done that; show that there are other options that hasn’t been explored yet
At each moment in history, possibilities that have not been utilized. Even today, all different options
open and society can change dramatically
What is the normative strategy?
- Normative; you have a set of moral standards and you apply them to reality
- Critical; in fact, you also have conflicts. By revealing those conflicts and those opportunities
not taken, you reveal the opportunities for change
MICHEL FOUCAULT
Who is Michel Foucault (1926-1984)?
Most of his work; not about politics, but about the history of science. History is not one line, there are
clear breaks where science completely revolutionized itself. Progression of different scientific
, HC Political Philosophy and Organ. Studies - PART 2, Emma Hamm 2078889
paradigms.
- if you want to produce knowledge, you need power relations
Bv; prisoners in the same building for years, researchers can do research on those people. They have
the power on criminals to lock them up and force them to different kind of therapy
● French political philosopher
● The interweaving of knowledge and power
(1) Traditional view
- Knowledge and power are opposed
- Conflicts of interest
- Example: tobacco industry and cancer research
Powers started funding research that claims the opposite of the truth. ‘Tobacco
doesn’t
cause cancer’
(2) Foucault’s view
- Knowledge and power presuppose each other (+work together)
- Knowledge informs the exercise of power + power facilitates the acquisition of
Knowledge
Bv research on tobacco and cancer. Within the lab a higher hierarchy of power. You
need
those to make the lab function. You need power to make research possible
Knowledge → exercise power → translate it back into knowledge
The norm is when power and knowledge work together.
● ⇒ VERY INTRINSICALLY CONNECTED. Should be one term; ‘Knowledge-power’
→ Every production of knowledge requires power relations and vice versa.
Truth/knowledge can be contested. You can formulate counter-knowledge: both sides
can produce knowledge, both sides can be true, yet they are not compatible
<verenigbaar>. There is no judge for who is right and who is wrong.
● Example: psychiatry – the abnormal people weren’t distinguished from the normal people.
Back then, those abnormal insane people spoke the truth. Were seen as a mirror of society
17-18; great enclosure. State decides that if they want a productive society, you need to have
productive people. Lock up the unproductive (abnormal, homeless, unemployed,...) →
distinguishing between productive and unproductive
18-19; group of unproductives → group of doctors come in and make distinctions in this group
between the normal and mentally ill people. The insane people should get therapy etc so
they can become normal again and re-enter society
Cooperation between doctors and capitalists: those who are sane should not be locked up,
and thus increase the amount of laborers and decrease the power of workers. We need to
cure insane people, through psychiatric treatment, so that they can as well be productive.
● Example: criminology – locking people up helps to create knowledge by forcing those people
to things like therapy
FOUCAULT’S TYPOLOGY OF POWER
Assumptions that Focault consents
Wrong assumptions you might have about power …
1. Power is bad
→ No, power is productive and can be legitimate
HC Political Philosophy and Organ.
Studies - PART 2
7. Michel Foucault on Power 2
8. Disciplinary Power 5
9. Neoliberalism 8
10. Expulsion 13
11. Contemporary issues: Post-Fordism 17
12. Contemporary issues: Econocracy 20
13. Platform Capitalism 25
, HC Political Philosophy and Organ. Studies - PART 2, Emma Hamm 2078889
7. Michel Foucault on Power
Critical theory
- Political philosophy as a branch of social philosophy
- Philosopher as cartographer
CRITICAL THEORY
Split in the tradition of political philosophy (see lecture 1)
→ Anglo-saxon normative theory (you suffer from conflicts of interests, so extract yourself from
society)
VS
→ continental critical theory (scaling up of question, what should WE as a society do?. Have critique
on the normative theory, because you are already in society / circle)
Start from non-ideal circumstances
● Presence of conflict: ‘politics is war through other means’ (Foucault)
Society; football match with 2 teams where no one sets the rules
engaging in conflict, but never becomes as intense as actual war (physical) - degree of
intensity, so not two completely different things as normative theory says. There is not a good
way of doing politics, because you always have a starting point in the debate (neutral position
not possible, as normative theorists argue).
● Political philosopher as cartographer of the present
→ Philosophy as ‘critique’
Mapping out the different conflicts. This is where the critique part comes from in philosophy
Critique of society at its present moment - what are the conditions where this idea comes from .
Bv; re-educating prisoners. How do we all have this idea? Because historically this wasn’t the case
- Conditions of possibilities
- Once you have done that; show that there are other options that hasn’t been explored yet
At each moment in history, possibilities that have not been utilized. Even today, all different options
open and society can change dramatically
What is the normative strategy?
- Normative; you have a set of moral standards and you apply them to reality
- Critical; in fact, you also have conflicts. By revealing those conflicts and those opportunities
not taken, you reveal the opportunities for change
MICHEL FOUCAULT
Who is Michel Foucault (1926-1984)?
Most of his work; not about politics, but about the history of science. History is not one line, there are
clear breaks where science completely revolutionized itself. Progression of different scientific
, HC Political Philosophy and Organ. Studies - PART 2, Emma Hamm 2078889
paradigms.
- if you want to produce knowledge, you need power relations
Bv; prisoners in the same building for years, researchers can do research on those people. They have
the power on criminals to lock them up and force them to different kind of therapy
● French political philosopher
● The interweaving of knowledge and power
(1) Traditional view
- Knowledge and power are opposed
- Conflicts of interest
- Example: tobacco industry and cancer research
Powers started funding research that claims the opposite of the truth. ‘Tobacco
doesn’t
cause cancer’
(2) Foucault’s view
- Knowledge and power presuppose each other (+work together)
- Knowledge informs the exercise of power + power facilitates the acquisition of
Knowledge
Bv research on tobacco and cancer. Within the lab a higher hierarchy of power. You
need
those to make the lab function. You need power to make research possible
Knowledge → exercise power → translate it back into knowledge
The norm is when power and knowledge work together.
● ⇒ VERY INTRINSICALLY CONNECTED. Should be one term; ‘Knowledge-power’
→ Every production of knowledge requires power relations and vice versa.
Truth/knowledge can be contested. You can formulate counter-knowledge: both sides
can produce knowledge, both sides can be true, yet they are not compatible
<verenigbaar>. There is no judge for who is right and who is wrong.
● Example: psychiatry – the abnormal people weren’t distinguished from the normal people.
Back then, those abnormal insane people spoke the truth. Were seen as a mirror of society
17-18; great enclosure. State decides that if they want a productive society, you need to have
productive people. Lock up the unproductive (abnormal, homeless, unemployed,...) →
distinguishing between productive and unproductive
18-19; group of unproductives → group of doctors come in and make distinctions in this group
between the normal and mentally ill people. The insane people should get therapy etc so
they can become normal again and re-enter society
Cooperation between doctors and capitalists: those who are sane should not be locked up,
and thus increase the amount of laborers and decrease the power of workers. We need to
cure insane people, through psychiatric treatment, so that they can as well be productive.
● Example: criminology – locking people up helps to create knowledge by forcing those people
to things like therapy
FOUCAULT’S TYPOLOGY OF POWER
Assumptions that Focault consents
Wrong assumptions you might have about power …
1. Power is bad
→ No, power is productive and can be legitimate
