Foucault Surveillance

Panopticism, a social theory based on Jeremy Bentham’s Panopticon and developed by Michel Foucault describes a disciplinary mechanism used in various aspects of society. Foucault’s Discipline and Punish discusses the development of discipline in Western society, looks in particularly at Bentham’s Panopticon and how it is a working example of how the theory is employed effectively. Foucault explains, in Discipline and Punish that ‘this book is intended as a correlative history of the modern soul and of a new power to judge’ (Foucault, 1977) and opens with accounts of public execution and torture revealing how law and order is created because of the shift from these to prison rules and discipline. Foucault describes the quarantining and

Michel Foucault- Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison Michel Foucault is a very famous French intellectual who practiced the knowledge of sociology. Foucault analyzed how knowledge related to social structures, in particular the concept of punishment within the penal system. His theory through, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, is a detailed outline of the disciplinary society; in which organizes populations, their relations to power formations, and the corresponding conceptions of the subjects themselves. Previously, this type of punishment focused on torture and dismemberment, in which was applied directly to bodies. Foucault mentions through his literary piece, “the soul is the effect and instrument of a political anatomy: the soul is the prison of the body (p.30). However, today, the notion of punishment involves public appearances in a court and much more humane sentences. However, it is important to note and to understand the idea of power and knowledge; it is fundamental to understand the social system as a whole.

Sandra Bartky begins her piece by explaining Michel Foucault’s ideas about modern power dynamics. Unlike in the past, power in modern society focuses not only on controlling the products of the body but, rather, on governing all its activities. In order for this power to continue, people are disciplined into becoming “docile bodies” which are subjected and practiced (Bartky, 63). This discipline is imposed through constant surveillance in a manner similar to the Panopticon. Inmates in said prison are always visible to a guard in the central tower, so they mentally coerced into monitoring their own behavior. In the same way, individuals become their own jailers and subject themselves to the society’s whim due to being in a “state of conscious and permanent visibility” to its all-seeing eye (65). Bartky, however, breaks from Foucault’s theory by claiming that there is a clear difference in the disciplines imposed on men and women that are ignored in the latter’s writings.

Crime is inevitable in society, whether it be in traditional societies or in modern society. However, with an action, there are always has to be a consequence, however when breaking the law, the consequences are rather bad, and sometimes harsh. This is called punishment. Discipline is enforcing acceptable patterns of behaviour and teaching obedience. In an excerpt called Discipline and Punish, contemporary theorist Michael Foucault explains these two concepts. This paper will summarize the author’s main points; provide a comparison with a theorist previously lectured on in class, as well as a personal interpretation of Foucault’s arguments.

Foucault however, argues that the prisons is one disciplinary institution that isn’t effective in reducing criminal activity through ‘self-surveillance’ as it urges an individual to deter from the rest of society and their shared norms and values. He said that this constant supervision and forced discipline broke the will of the criminal and made him into a “docile body”. His book ‘Discipline and Punish’ lays out Foucault’s thoughts on how the elite in society dominate and control the rest of society. Prison’s major goal was to reduce crime by punishing the criminal. Prisons should also deter others from committing crimes. According to Foucault, prisons did not meet their objective; in fact they made criminals worse and this has infiltrated into all parts of society.

The paragmatic standpoints of the sociologist are different. Simmel’s vision is detacher from the particular individuals and in concentrated on the group as the analysis item. Group, according to Simmel, is an entity that has an independent reality, exists according to its own laws and is independent of the individual agents. A group, just as an individual, has a tendency to self-preservation due to a special vitality, the basis and process of which Simmel studies. Mead, in his turn, seeks to solve the problem of the individual self and consciousness about world and society. The key concept in his research is the concept of action, active activity (and not just a passive reaction according to the stimulus-response scheme as in classical behaviorists). Both of them mind action as the part of the social life, however,

George Herbert Mead and Erving Goffman are two theorists in the study of sociology that have impacted the way we see sociology today. Their works, when closely examined, actually share some extreme similarities. Both of these men seemed very interested in the perception of self in the eyes of others as well as yourself. “Mind, Self, and Society” is an article written by Mead which was placed in the book entitled “Social Theory: The Classic Tradition to Post-Modernism” which was edited by Farganis with the copyright of McGraw-Hill in 2004. This primarily deals with the development of one’s self, or their identity. “Presentation of Self in Everyday Life” is an article written by Goffman which was arranged to be in the book “Inner Lives and

The well-researched, clear and comprehensive discussion of the history of discipline and punishment, coupled with the expansive philosophical questioning and criticism of the past systems used to punish, provides readers with an in-depth understanding of the history of discipline and punishment and generates support of Foucault’s suggestions regarding effective

Introduction Michel Foucault and Erving Goffman’s work was centralised around there 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 who was 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 who was A Canadian Born Sociologist who’s key study was what

“In this task of adjustment, discipline had to solve a number of problems for which the old economy of power was not sufficiently equipped. It could reduce the inefficiency of mass phenomena: reduce what, in a multiplicity, make it much less manageable than unity; reduce what is opposed to the use of each of its elements and of their sum; reduce everything that may counter the advantages.” (Foucault 208). This is an example of Logos, he talks about the prison and how “With all the corrective technology at its disposal is to be resituated at the point where the codified power to punish turns into a disciplinary power to observe” (Foucault 213).

Foucault’s theorisation of the power/knowledge relationship Foucault in theorizing the relationship between power and knowledge basically focused on how power operated in the institutions and in its techniques. The point is how power was supported by knowledge in the functioning of institutions of punishment. “He places the body at the centre of the struggles between different formations of power/knowledge. The techniques of regulation are applied to the body” (Wheterell et al., 2001: 78)

It was by doing this that the disciplinary self was created - “discipline ‘makes’ individuals”, a phenomenon of the disciplinary era (1977, p.170). Our movement through the institutions defined our individualisation; normalising, examining and hierarchically observing each member of society (Foucault, 1977) - our sense of self emerged from their intersections. In Postcript on the Societies of Control (1992), Deleuze states the S.O.D have made way for the S.O.C. He mainly attributes this shift to the environments of “enclosure” (1992, p.4) – the institutions – beginning to crumble, and the factory – a typical workplace on the S.O.D – being replaced by the corporation (1992). In the S.O.D Foucault claimed that the soldier can be moulded like “a formless clay” (1977, p.135) – these rigid institutions formed us. Now without these institutions we lose this mould, and therefore our concept of the ‘self’. Imagine if instead of pushing clay into a mould we placed it on a desk; it would be shapeless and adaptable. This according to Deleuze is a defining characteristic of the S.O.C; flexibility in our structures moving us from moulds to “modulations” (1992, p.4). These modulations are “a self-deforming cast that will continuously change from one moment to the other” (1992, p.4). Instead of experiencing these rigid disciplines, we are left in this soft, malleable environment, which constantly

From Durkheim’s perspective, society creates the individuals but also individuals create the society. For Durkheim, the desires and egocentricity of people are only held in check by influences that are created outside of the individual. Division of labor produces solidarity, which leads to a general cohesion of society. Plus, the economy and division of labor have positive effects on society that allows to social unity. On the other hand, Weber sees the religion influences, Protestant ethic is individuals’ being predestined. Everyone has to work hard and demonstrate their ability to reinvest money in their enterprises and maintain poverty as immortal and view the place of work as an improvement. Consequently, the change in ideals and customs are what contributed to the rise of modern

Michel Foucault’s “Panopticism” in Discipline and Punish considers the Panopticon a metaphor for the function of power in modern society. The Panopticon is an architectural concept for a prison that was published in the late 18th century by an English philosopher named Jeremy Bentham. The Panopticon consists of hundreds of prison cells in a circle around one central guard tower. This design allows prison guards to observe every prisoner without the prisoners knowing when they are being watched. This creates a system of discipline by instilling fear and paranoia, therefore keeping the prisoners in check. Foucault applied the philosophy of the Panopticon to explain how discipline and punishment works, thereby affecting the way people behave in modern society. According to Foucault: “He who is subjected to a field of visibility, and who knows it, assumes responsibility for the constraints of power; he makes them play spontaneously upon himself; he inscribes in himself the power relation in which he simultaneously plays both roles; he becomes the principle of his own subjection” (202-203).

Understanding of the Self INTRODUCTION      The social constructionist perspective holds the view that the self is continuing "shaped and reshaped through interactions with others and involvement in social and cultural activities" (Wetherell & Maybin, 1996, p 220). Social constructionist is concerned with explicating the processes by which people come to describe, explain, or otherwise account for the world (including themselves) in which they live (Gergen, 1971). Thus, the social constructionist approach implies that the self is shaped by social interaction within historical, cultural and social contexts. Social constructionist's apply an analysis of societal level which explain the self through social relations. Conversely, the