Foucault Power and Knowledge

Summary

In this video, we delve into Michel Foucault's influential theories on the intricate relationship between power and knowledge. Foucault revolutionizes traditional political thought by shifting focus from the rulers to the ruled, advocating that power is not a top-down force but a pervasive, circulating entity. He challenges the conventional view that power suppresses knowledge, instead arguing that power generates knowledge, thus controlling what is known and knowable. The video also addresses the limitations of Foucault's theories, questioning the origins of power and the implications for political change.

Takeaways

• 😀 Foucault is a highly influential 20th-century thinker, particularly known for his insights on the relationship between power and knowledge.
• 🔍 Traditional political philosophy focuses on the ruler and the state, whereas Foucault shifts the focus to the ruled and the everyday power dynamics.
• 🏛️ Foucault critiques the traditional approach to power, arguing that it is too simplistic and hierarchical, suggesting instead that power circulates and permeates all aspects of society.
• 🏫 Foucault examines institutions like schools and prisons to understand how power operates and disciplines individuals, influencing their behavior and internalization of authority.
• ⏰ He discusses the role of routines, schedules, and structures within institutions as mechanisms that enforce discipline and normalize certain behaviors.
• 📚 Foucault posits that power dictates the terms of knowledge, shaping what can be known and how it is understood, challenging the conventional view of power and knowledge as separate entities.
• 🌟 Power, according to Foucault, does not suppress knowledge; instead, it has an appetite for it, seeking to categorize and control the knowable.
• 🤔 The script raises questions about Foucault's philosophy, such as how it's possible to know anything if power dictates knowledge, and what the implications are for studying power itself.
• 🧐 Foucault's work leaves open the question of the origin and nature of power, which could be seen as an amorphous force that is always present and shaping society.
• 🌐 The script suggests that Foucault's views may challenge the feasibility of political change, as power is seen as an ever-shifting and reconstituting entity rather than a static structure to be overthrown.

Q & A

Who is Michel Foucault and why is he significant?

Michel Foucault is one of the most influential thinkers of the 20th century known for his work on the relationship between power and knowledge. His ideas have significantly impacted various fields including philosophy, sociology, and political theory.

What is the traditional approach to the problem of power according to the video?

The traditional approach to the problem of power is based on juridico-institutional models, focusing on sovereignty, the theory of the state, and who holds power within a community.

How does Foucault's perspective on power differ from traditional political philosophy?

Foucault's perspective differs by focusing on the ruled rather than the rulers, and by viewing power as a circulating force that permeates all aspects of society, rather than a top-down hierarchical structure.

What does Foucault suggest about the power dynamics in institutions like schools?

Foucault suggests that power dynamics in institutions like schools are evident in their structures, such as rows in classrooms, bells, and daily routines, which discipline individuals into responding to authority and internalizing power structures.

How does Foucault view the relationship between power and knowledge?

Foucault views power as dictating the terms of knowledge, suggesting that power decides what can be known, how much should be known, and even what can be considered true or knowable.

What is the conventional Greek view on the relationship between power and knowledge as mentioned in the video?

The conventional Greek view, traceable to philosophers like Plato, is that political leaders need proper knowledge to use power well, akin to how a ship's captain or a doctor needs expertise to perform their roles effectively.

What does Foucault argue about the nature of power in terms of its relationship with knowledge?

Foucault argues that power does not suppress knowledge but rather produces it, with an appetite for categorization and control, as a knowable thing can be more easily managed.

What are the two major problems with Foucault's argument as discussed in the video?

The two major problems are: 1) If power produces knowledge, how can we know anything, especially about power itself, without merely participating in it? 2) Foucault does not clearly explain where power comes from, what it wants, or if it has agency, which threatens the validity of his argument.

How does the concept of wellness illustrate Foucault's idea of power's relationship with knowledge?

The concept of wellness illustrates Foucault's idea by showing how relaxation and leisure have been turned into a discipline and industry, with power entering this domain and categorizing it, making it knowable and controllable.

What is the implication of Foucault's view on power for political change and the establishment of just power structures?

Foucault's view implies that political change might not be about overturning power structures but rather about power reconstituting itself in different forms, which challenges the idea of establishing a more just power structure.

Outlines

00:00

🧠 Understanding Foucault's Perspective on Power and Knowledge

This paragraph introduces the topic of discussion, which is the influential French philosopher Michel Foucault and his examination of the relationship between power and knowledge. The speaker aims to clarify Foucault's key insights, which are often misunderstood. The focus is on how Foucault diverges from traditional political philosophy by emphasizing the analysis of power's penetration into everyday life and individual bodies, rather than just its institutional forms. The speaker references Giorgio Agamben's interpretation of Foucault, highlighting his departure from the 'juridico institutional' models of power to a more nuanced view that includes the ways power affects our lives in spaces like prisons and hospitals, not just in traditional political institutions.

05:01

🏫 The Impact of Power Structures on Daily Life

The second paragraph delves into Foucault's examination of power dynamics within societal institutions, using the school system as an example. It discusses how schools, through their structures and routines, discipline students into certain behaviors and responses, effectively internalizing power structures. The paragraph also explores Foucault's radical view on the relationship between power and knowledge, suggesting that power dictates what can be known and studied, and thus shapes our understanding of truth and reality. The speaker points out that Foucault sees power as having an appetite for knowledge, as it allows for categorization and control, challenging the conventional view of power as suppressive of knowledge.

10:02

🤔 Foucault's Challenges: Power, Knowledge, and Political Change

The final paragraph addresses the complexities and criticisms of Foucault's theories. It raises questions about the implications of his views on power and knowledge, particularly how it affects our ability to know and understand power itself. The speaker also discusses the issue of the origin and nature of power, noting that Foucault does not provide clear answers, which could undermine his entire argument. Furthermore, it touches upon the challenges Foucault's ideas pose to traditional notions of political change and justice, suggesting that his view might not support the idea of overthrowing an unjust regime in favor of a more just one, as power is seen as an ever-changing and self-reconstituting force.

Keywords

💡Michel Foucault

Michel Foucault was a French philosopher, historian of ideas, and social theorist whose work has had a profound impact on the humanities and social sciences. In the video, he is discussed as one of the most influential thinkers of the 20th century, particularly in understanding the relationship between power and knowledge. His ideas are central to the video's theme, as the narrator aims to unpack his complex theories for better understanding.

💡Power

In the context of the video, power is not seen as a simple top-down force but as a dynamic that circulates and permeates various aspects of society. Foucault's perspective on power is that it is not just about who rules but also about how it affects the ruled and the structures that govern everyday life. The video discusses how power is visible in institutions like prisons and schools, shaping behavior and producing certain types of individuals.

💡Knowledge

Knowledge, as discussed in the video in relation to Foucault's work, is intertwined with power. It's not just about what is known but also about who has the authority to define what can be known and how it is known. The video suggests that power dictates the terms of knowledge, shaping what is considered true and what can even be explored as knowledge.

💡Discipline

Discipline, in Foucault's framework, refers to the systematic regulation of behavior through various institutions like schools and prisons. The video uses the example of schools to illustrate how discipline is used to produce obedient subjects who conform to certain standards and schedules, internalizing power structures in the process.

💡Giorgio Agamben

Giorgio Agamben is an Italian philosopher whose work is mentioned in the video as a clear summation of Foucault's project. Agamben's perspective is used to highlight Foucault's departure from traditional political philosophy, focusing instead on the concrete ways power operates within society.

💡Sovereignty

Sovereignty, in the traditional sense discussed in the video, refers to the power of a ruler or state. Foucault challenges this concept by suggesting that power is not centralized in a sovereign but is dispersed and operates through various social mechanisms and institutions.

💡Aristotle

Aristotle is referenced in the video to contrast his political philosophy with Foucault's. While Aristotle's theory of regimes categorizes governments based on the number of rulers and their interests, Foucault shifts the focus to the ways power is exercised and perceived by the ruled.

💡Truth

The video discusses the conventional view of truth as something that exists independently of power, often in opposition to it. However, Foucault's perspective suggests that power and knowledge are so intertwined that power produces truth, shaping what can be known and what is considered true.

💡Wellness

Wellness is used as an example in the video to illustrate how power operates in the production of knowledge. The concept of wellness has been transformed into a discipline and industry, suggesting that power has an appetite for knowledge and seeks to categorize and control aspects of life that were once considered personal or unregulated.

💡Agency

Agency, in the context of the video, refers to the capacity of power to act or have intentions. The video raises questions about whether power has agency, suggesting that Foucault's work leaves unclear where power comes from and what its intentions might be, which is a critique of his theory.

Highlights

Foucault's key insights revolve around the relationship between power and knowledge.

Foucault abandons traditional juridico-institutional models of power in favor of analyzing its concrete manifestations.

Agamben summarizes Foucault's work as a decisive abandonment of traditional approaches to power.

Foucault's work challenges the traditional political philosophy by focusing on the ruled rather than the rulers.

Power, according to Foucault, is not a hierarchical, one-way force but circulates and permeates society.

Foucault shifts focus from political institutions to everyday spaces like prisons and hospitals to understand power dynamics.

The state is considered superstructural by Foucault, as it operates on the basis of already existing power relations.

Foucault's analysis of schools as disciplinary institutions highlights how power structures are internalized.

Power and knowledge are deeply intertwined, with power dictating the terms of what can be known.

Foucault extends Aristotle's view that politics is the master science, determining the scope of other sciences.

Foucault suggests that power has an appetite for knowledge, as it allows for categorization and control.

The concept of wellness as an industry exemplifies how power invades and codifies aspects of life.

Foucault argues that power produces knowledge, not just suppresses it, challenging the conventional view.

The question of how it's possible to know anything about power if power produces knowledge is a major issue in Foucault's theory.

Foucault's work does not fully explain the origin or agency of power, which threatens the validity of his argument.

The implications of Foucault's views on power challenge the possibility of political change and the establishment of just power structures.

Transcripts

hi everyone so today we're going to talk

about michelle foucault and particularly

the relationship between power

and knowledge foucault is certainly one

of the most influential thinkers of the

20th century in fact

i would say you'd be hard-pressed to

find anybody who's been as influential

however people really struggle to

understand foucault

so i'm going to try to help you with

that in this video i'm going to talk

about foucault's key

insights and by the end of the video

we'll also discuss a couple of the major

problems with foucault's argument so you

can understand the limitations

of his thinking and as i mentioned if

you really want to understand fuko

i think you really have to understand

the relationship between power

and knowledge

[Music]

so for my money one of the clearest and

best summations

of foucault's whole project can be found

in this work by giorgio agamben

now agamon himself is another difficult

to understand theorist

and so when you first read this this is

going to seem difficult

but i promise you it's all going to make

sense in a second so agamon says

one of the most persistent features of

foucault's work is its decisive

abandonment of the traditional approach

to the problem of power

which is based on juridico institutional

models

the definition of sovereignty the theory

of the state

in favor of an unprejudiced analysis of

the concrete ways in which power

penetrates

subjects very bodies and forms of life

come again so essentially what agamon is

saying is that foucault's work

takes the whole tradition of political

philosophy and turns it on its head

and this is partly why foucault is hard

for us to understand because

when we first read him he seems to be

thinking about things

upside down and backwards now to

understand foucault's innovation let's

think for a second about traditional

modes of political thought

in particular let's think about

aristotle aristotle famously advanced

this theory of the six regimes

his claim was that all governments all

regimes can fit into one of six

categories

governments are differentiated from each

other in a couple of ways first

by number the number of rulers is the

regime world by one person like a

monarchy

or is it ruled by many like in a

democracy and the other thing we need to

look at is interest

whose interest does the ruling party

serve the public interest

or its own interest this according to

aristotle's what differentiates a

monarchy from a tyranny

a monarchy and a tyranny both have one

ruler but the monarchy rules

in the public interest while a tyrant

clearly rules in his own interest

so this is what agamben was saying about

the sovereign and the state

the traditional way to think about

politics is to focus on

who rules everything then follows from

what kind of power structure a community

has in place

different regimes will have different

laws and will produce different types of

citizens

foucault flips everything around instead

of focusing on the ruler

he consistently focuses our attention on

the ruled

but it goes further because fuco's other

main point is that

our traditional accounts of power are

reductive

they're too simple power is not this

hierarchical

one-way force that moves from the top

down

rather foucault says power circulates it

moves

all around us and even through us

foucault

asks us where is power visible is it

only in the senate or the courtroom or

the parliament

this he thinks is an oversimplification

matcha foucault's work is about drawing

our attention to

other kinds of spaces like prisons or

hospitals

it's in these places where foucault

argues power dynamics are most clearly

visible

if we try to understand power only by

attending to the state

or the sovereign to explicitly political

institutions

we're missing the whole picture foucault

is less interested in rulers

lawmakers and forms of government he

wants to move beyond the state

first of all because the state for all

the omnipotence of its apparatuses

is far from being able to occupy the

whole field of actual power relations

and further because the state can only

operate on the basis of other

already existing power relations the

state is super structural in relation to

a whole series of power networks that

invest the body

sexuality the family kinship knowledge

technology and so forth

let's take a school for example when we

think about what's happening in schools

we

typically think about well what are

students studying are they studying

math or science history and when we

think about power dynamics we

usually think about a teacher a teacher

is kind of like a ruler

in the classroom but foucault would say

we're missing the whole picture

he wants us to focus on the whole

apparatus of a school system why do

classrooms so often have rows

and why do schools have bells and

meticulously worked out daily routines

and schedules

foucault talks about this in one of his

most famous works discipline and punish

and he suggests that

those kinds of structures produce a

person they discipline you

into being the sort of person who

responds to bells who responds to

schedules who

responds to a particular mode of

authority not only that

but schools incentivize us and reward us

in ways that prompt us to internalize

these power structures

when we're in school we try to be good

students we try our best

we want to excel at obedience that's

power okay now let's talk a bit more

explicitly about the relationship

between power and knowledge

because here again foucault is flipping

the tradition

on its head the conventional way of

thinking about this relationship between

power and knowledge is again

traceable to the ancient greeks you've

probably heard people talk about the

ship of state

this is a classical metaphor used to

illustrate the importance of political

expertise

philosophers like plato liking governing

a city to piloting a ship

in both situations lacking the proper

knowledge

the right kind of expertise will doom

you

doom the ship or the state to failure

this is a classic socratic argument that

our political leaders much like ships

captains

or carpenters or doctors need to know

what they're doing and if they don't

have the proper knowledge

then they will use power badly so this

is the conventional way of thinking

about power and knowledge

think about a chainsaw for example if

you have a chainsaw

and you know how to use it well you can

do things with that chainsaw

but if you have the chainsaw and you

don't know how to use it

well you can hurt yourself and others

now

foucault posits a more radical

relationship between power and knowledge

the key claim is really that power

dictates the terms of knowledge

so power decides what things there

are and in what ways they can be known

now in some respects this isn't entirely

radical this is just an extension of

something aristotle said which is that

politics is the master science

and it determines what all the other

sciences can do

what ought to be taught in school how

much ought to be known what ought not to

be studied

that's just the business of politics

foucault extends this argument and

suggests that

if power dictates what can be studied

how much should be known

what cannot be known then doesn't power

in a sense dictate what is

true and maybe even more what can even

be knowable

think about something like wellness

basically

we've taken relaxation leisure rest

and turned it into a whole industry a

discipline

we have conferences on wellness we can

now take degrees

in wellness studies our free time our

leisure is now being codified

and measured we are being encouraged to

discipline ourselves into resting

properly

foucault might suggest that what we see

here is power invading

entering into this new region or

territory of our lives

power actually has a kind of appetite

for

knowledge because a knowable thing is

something

categorizable it has definite limits and

if it can be known

it can be controlled we sometimes

imagine an adversarial relationship

between truth and power

we might think of figures like socrates

or galileo as

these lovers of knowledge who speak

truth to power

foucault imagines a very different

relationship where

power actually produces knowledge so in

the fuconian sense power is not

interested

in the suppression of knowledge or the

suppression of truth

power actually wants the proliferation

of knowledge

power wants more and more things to be

identified to be categorized to be

defined

once we become objects of knowledge we

become subject

to power power has an appetite for

knowledge and increasingly fine

distinctions

increase powers reach now you don't have

to agree with this foucault might be

wrong and as i said there are serious

problems with foucault's argument and

i'm gonna address two of them here

problem one if power does produce

knowledge

how is it possible to know anything and

in particular

how is it possible to know anything

about power

foucault i don't think ever fully solves

this problem

wouldn't studying power then just be

participating in power we are studying

things that power wants us to study and

we're learning about the categories that

power has already defined for us

and if all that's the case what is

foucault

doing as a thinker and a writer how does

he understand his own project if

knowledge

is subject to power second problem what

is power where does it come from what

does it want

does it want anything does it have

agency does it have an agenda

foco never really answers this question

and it threatens to invalidate his whole

argument

foucault is very useful and very

effective

at describing power's effects he's very

good very persuasive about describing

the way power works powers techniques

the things it

does and how it operates in our lives

all that is very persuasive and

believable

but where power comes from it's kind of

like the force

it's just out there all this means in

focalin terms

it may not be possible to overthrow an

unjust regime for vico political change

just means power endlessly

reconstituting itself in different

forms the whole idea of overturning a

government or a power structure

in order to establish a more just power

structure

becomes kind of suspect aren't we just

substituting one power formation for

another power formation

and if you think there are political

models that are better or more just than

others

then i think we might have some problems

with foucault

that'll do it for now talk to you soon