Michel Foucault took up this subject in his own way and pointed out the importance of what he called the ‘technical procedures’ of power – that is, the ‘instrumentation’ – as a central activity in ‘the art of governing’ (Senellart, 1995).
For Foucault, the central issue was not the democratic or authoritarian nature of the state; nor did it relate to the essence of the state or to its ideology, factors which legiti- mize or fail to legitimize it. He looked through the opposite end of the telescope, taking the view that the central issue was that of the statization of society – that is, the development of a set of concrete devices, practices through which power is exercised materially. He proposed a study of the forms of rationality that organize powers. Analysing practices, he stressed that the exercise of discipline was at least as important as con- straint. Contrary to the traditional concept of an authoritarian power functioning through handing down injunction and sanction, he proposed a disciplinary concept that was based on concrete techniques for framing individuals, allowing their behaviours to be led from a distance.
In a 1984 text, he formulated his pro- gramme for the study of governmentality as follows. This approach:
Does not revolve around the general principle of the law or the myth of power, but concerns itself with the complex and multiple practices of a ‘gov- ernmentality’ that presupposes, on the one hand, rational forms, technical procedures, instrumenta- tions through which to operate, and, on the other, strategic games that subject the power relations they are supposed to guarantee to instability and reversal. (Foucault, 1984)
Michel Foucault took up this subject in his own way and pointed out the importance of what he called the ‘technical procedures’ of power – that is, the ‘instrumentation’ – as a central activity in ‘the art of governing’ (Senellart, 1995).For Foucault, the central issue was not the democratic or authoritarian nature of the state; nor did it relate to the essence of the state or to its ideology, factors which legiti- mize or fail to legitimize it. He looked through the opposite end of the telescope, taking the view that the central issue was that of the statization of society – that is, the development of a set of concrete devices, practices through which power is exercised materially. He proposed a study of the forms of rationality that organize powers. Analysing practices, he stressed that the exercise of discipline was at least as important as con- straint. Contrary to the traditional concept of an authoritarian power functioning through handing down injunction and sanction, he proposed a disciplinary concept that was based on concrete techniques for framing individuals, allowing their behaviours to be led from a distance.In a 1984 text, he formulated his pro- gramme for the study of governmentality as follows. This approach:Does not revolve around the general principle of the law or the myth of power, but concerns itself with the complex and multiple practices of a ‘gov- ernmentality’ that presupposes, on the one hand, rational forms, technical procedures, instrumenta- tions through which to operate, and, on the other, strategic games that subject the power relations they are supposed to guarantee to instability and reversal. (Foucault, 1984)
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
