Foucault Discipline and Punish - Case Study Example

FAUCAULT DISCIPLINE AND PUNISH By Key words: Managing Foucault work Michael Foucault whose theory were designed to address power and knowledge (Nola, 1998). He also addressed the use of power and knowledge as social control in institutions in the society. Through the theories he joined several groups that dealt with anti-racism and also anti-human right abuses. Michael considered himself stupid due to his childhood life which he could not later well tell. He went through his four years secondary education doing poor in mathematics but excelled much in Greek, Latin, French and history (Deleuze and Hand, 1988). He was enrolled to Saint –Stanislas which he thought was a very strict institution due to the running of the institution by the Roman Catholic. He describes life in the collage to be suffering but through all that he excelled academically. He had much excellence in philosophy, literature and history. In his final year he mainly focused on philosophy (Nola, 1998). Foucault spends much time in later years writing in praise of suicide and self-mutilation. He was examined by doctors and they thought his tendencies came about due to his homosexuality and since same sex activities were prohibited in France (Deleuze and Hand, 1988). He was involved in homosexuality and according to a biographer he thought this was thrilling and enjoyed the dangers of the activities (Foucault, 1978). His thought and actions has influenced academic groups and also activist groups that tend to copy his actions. He thought that what the scientists claimed to be their knowledge were just means for social control over the society (Foucault, 1965). He gave an example how in the eighteenth century insanity was used to classify the mentally ill leaving out the poor, the sick, those without homes and those that had individuality. He then took interest in work which explored the history on science and also developed interest in publications by Gaston Bachelard (Foucault, 1971). Foucault’s work left out much room for optimism since it only illustrates discipline of philosophy and how it can be used in identification of areas of much influence. Through the philosophy, one is able to understand how domination comes about in the society and try to come up with strategies of building social structures to reduce the risk of being dominated (Deleuze and Hand, 1988). In the context he said there have to be details and the details are the ones that make the people individualize themselves. Foucault later in his literature life explained that he did mainly the work of analyzing the power as a spectacle and not much on trying to characterize the different ways in which the community has exercised much use of power to the less ranked in the setting (Foucault, 1965). The subjects according to him have taken three main broad forms (Foucault, 1971). Scientific authority is the first form which mainly classifies the subjects in accordance to their knowledge on human population. The second form was identifying the subjects through identifying their madness, facial features aspect and the illness (Foucault, 1978). The last form was his relation to the impulse to fashion sexual identities. This to him trained one’s body to engage in daily and routine practices theta resulted in bringing about certain patterns to the given society. Foucault work on power and discipline Foucault wrote about discipline and punish in his book The Birth of the Prison. The publication focused on the theoretical mechanisms that are behind the many changes which occurred the western systems during the current times (Foucault, 1965). His arguments are against the idea that the prison was the main way of punishment to those that wronged. He does this through keen follow on the situations that led to dominance by the prisons with much focus on the question on power (Foucault, 1971. He thought prison was used by technological power which can also be found in institutions, health facilities and in military barracks. He the n developed another work “security, territory, population” where he admits that he was overenthusiastic in his description on conditions of power in a society (Foucault, 1978). His ideas on power and discipline were based on four principles. The principles include torture, punishment, prison and discipline. He examined public torture and excursions. He explains that the executions original intentions led to the production of more unintended consequences (Foucault, 2001). The philosopher describes a legal framework how the torture operates to achieve the intended purposes. He vies public torture as a ceremony. He thinks the intended purpose for torture was to make the secrete public since the investigations were kept secret from even those that were accused (Koontz and Donnells, 1980). He argues that torture was also to show the effect of the investigation since it could be done during the investigation of a crime. The partial proofs that were got meant partial guilt. Through this he believed that if the tortured could not confess then the person was not guilty. Torture was also meant to reflect the violence of the original crime to the convicted such that all were able to view it (Koontz and Donnells, 1980). The torture was also to enact revenge to the convicted with the authorities thinking to have been much injured by the crime. Punishment did not involve immediate transfer to prison. There was more as prison was thought differently by the public. Punishment was not that harsh but it was still non humanitarian. He argues that those in the reforms were not happy with the unpredictable nature of the violence that was also uneven. The sovereign’s right to give punishment was much unequal making it ineffective and unrestrained (Foucault, 2001). According to him, prisoners should have been made to do the work that was equal to the crime they made which could equally pay the society for the uncertainties that they caused. This would make the public to see the convicts body that enacted their punishment that reflects to the crime caused. According to Foucault, prisons emerged as a form of punishment to crimes that came about due to discipline in the 18th and 19th century (Foucault, 1971). He suggests the development of new political and economic bodies for modern institutions that he said needs to be individuated. This would lead to creation of new individuality for the bodies. Individual discipline would make one with different characteristics namely cellular, organic, genetically and combinatory (Robbins and Coulter, 2005). The building of prisons according to Foucault was that the prisons became part of the strict system (Koontz and Donnells, 1980). He thinks prison is a network that includes military barracks, schools, hospitals and factories which aims in building a view of one as a whole society for its members. The system creates and increases the discipline levels to its members since they are guided within its walls. He thought that the systems operate in way that they are under scientific authority. It also operates in a system that cannot fail to produce the desired outcomes. This only comes along with proper management of the organizations. Empirical examples Michael developed a concept on govern mentality between 1977 and 1984. The concept has also been elaborated by authors such as Peter Miller and Mitchell Dean. Governmentally can be understood in several ways according to him (Drucker and Maciarriello, 2008). It can be understood as the way the government try to shape the citizens to fulfill their policies. It can also be understood as the organized practices including mentalities and rationalities and techniques through which the subjects in a government are ruled. Foucault developed a deep reflection of governmentality in his course “The Birth of Bio politics” which was first published in French in 2004 (Stoner, 1982). The course was also a wider analysis of the topic of disciplinary institutions. This is also on neoliberation and the rule of law. He developed second and third volumes of The History of Sexuality which talked on the use of pleasure and the care of self. He elaborated how the difference between being subjected and forms of subjectivities (Stoner, 1982). This was by exploring how individuals were fashioned and then lived in ways which were heteronomous and separately determined. The Foucault Effect led to the gaining of attention in the English speaking academic society. The book contained numerous essays about notion of governmentality. Foucault and Law which was published by Hunt and Wickham starts with the section of governmentality (Foucault, 2001). They state that governmentality is majorly the dramatic expression in the government’s scope. It includes the increased governmental calculations and strategies. They improve the definition by adding some of the basics that Michael discussed such as reason of the state, population problems, modern political economy and the rapid emergence of human sciences. Kerr thinks that govern mentalism is all about thinking about the government and its practices that are necessary in the control of the society. Dean breaks the term into govern and mentality and makes it not only a tool in thinking about the government but also puts in the thinking of those that are governed (Robbins and Coulter, 2005). He sums up the knowledge, the opinions and the beliefs of those that are governed. Foucault thinks it is all about restructuring power relations in the society. He also thinks that the governance has not been taken away but rather the focus of governance has been shifted to governing a more complex men and also their assets. Adhering to the notions of Foucault indicates that the society is no longer on the focus of all powers but the capacity is underestimated. Michael thinks that through freedom, self-governing capacities can be put into place with alignment with the political objectives. Governmentality revolves around technologies of power, the responsibility of one’s self, health, normalism and self-esteem (Drucker and Maciarriello, 2008). Space, knowledge and power is also an example of a work done by Foucault. It deals with the view from architectural work of building institutions, hospitals and prisons. It focuses mainly on Foucault’s engagement mainly on the geographical concerns. He found audience for his geographical views. Power issues in organizations In organization power is seemed to be conceived mostly between groups in the organization such between the managers and the employees (Foucault and Mazumdar, 1998). According to Foucault, power in organization should not be exercised by the managers through command, control and disciplinary actions. Power issues in organizations tend to take two perspectives (Robbins and Coulter, 2005). The finite perspective of power allows one to be able to offer their goods and services in the competitive market. This has come due to the increment in democracy most so in the United States. The power in the organization mostly aims in winning the competition against the other organizations rather than losing (Foucault and Mazumdar, 1998). Competition can be made friendly such that it becomes unnecessary since there is more chances of survival. The power in the organization can be when the organization undergoes win and lose to lose and lose treatment. This is the aspect where each component in the organization from individuals to departments fight for success in the organization. Another aspect of power in organizations is power struggle, conformity and productivity. In most of the organizations spend much time, strength, productivity and creativity are developed due to the power struggles. Some activities in organizations such as passive aggression, poor judgment, poor communication, personality conflicts, gossip and blame results much to downfalls in the organizations. Some organizations seem to be somehow peaceful in the outward look while in the real context they are not. The organizations waste more time and energy since most of the opinions and ideas that are needed for the development of the organizations never come to be. This is due to unacceptance of those that are in power and govern the organizations.Power struggle and differences are also aspects of power in organizations. The perspective is used to determine the person who wins and the other who loses (Stoner, 1982). Some differences in the organizations are problematic such as male winning over the female, white over the blacks and also Christians over the Muslims (Robbins and Coulter, 2005). These differences carry substantial charges that occur when the organizations are not able to deal with the differences. The diversities lead to the disruption of the organization effectiveness. This is because those that are ranked higher in the organizations are always winning against those that are low in the organization (Drucker and Maciarriello, 2008). Perception of differences in organizations as dangerous, the productivity is lost in the organization due to the power struggles and conformity. When the organizations carry out their activities from the win and lose perspective, there is belief that the power is scares and more infinite. In such organizations, the managers and also the employees of the organization mostly do their activities to compete, protect and increase their powers without considering the costs of the organization and its productivity (Foucault and Mazumdar, 1998). This should be their major concern of the employees. Foucault provided a new explanation on organizational powers and also innovative managerial techniques that are used such as team building, total equality in management and production that is done at the right times. The explanations that were done by him were those that could not be easily understood through only labor process theory. His arguments enables more understanding on the management of human resources and also the ethics in an organization. Foucault work remains the widespread influence on the management of organizations and used for the assumptions on the management knowledge and organization forms. Application of Foucault approach to management Through Foucault’s work it is clear that human resource management has been well understood as not be well undertaken and strategies have been put to ensure that they are reduced in the employment contracts. This is through the understanding of scholars such as Spector that say that resource management is a disjointed activity that needs to be corrected. Human resource management knowledge from Foucault provides an opportunity to restructure both historical and comparative analyses of the field. Michael’s work argues that in human resource management, the employees of an organization should be self-responsible and also initiated by self to enable them able to use full personalities on their work to the organization. Through the argument, today there is new creative management technologies that have come to fulfill the objective. Cases studies show that employees have been made to say about goals of their personal development (Merquior, 1987). There is more focus on the employee as a resource of interventions with classical management principles. Foucault brings the consequences of the management being considered as that is mainly for the leveling of power. Management currently has seized from being that involves dictation, controlling or putting of much pressure on the people. This has been met through the reduction of the demand on the employees (Foucault and Rabianow, 1984). The employees have become much responsible and see themselves to the needs of the organization. The current management also is that that gives the employee time to take charge and also being able to shape their individual identities and also build their careers. Involvement, participation, personal fulfillment are some of the values that have recently been used in management which shows that the employees should not be shown what to do and should be triggered to do what is right through personal initiatives. New management procedures have neglected shaping of personalities of employees to meet the organizational needs (Foucault and Rabianow, 1984). This has come about due to the presenting of the new technologies that present objective reality to the employees. This makes the current human resource management reveal the potentials and abilities of the employees of an organization. This brings power not to be exercised between groups and the management but also in individual. There have been current studies to examine the management focus on the employees. This have been done by different people. Rose came with the argument that technology has much improved the management (Merquior, 1987). This is after deeply studying the human resource management theory by Foucault. Townley has well come up with the idea and well demonstrated how there has been use of disciplinary practices that have made much use of human resource management theory. Anderson argued that the practices draw one upon Foucault as a form of inspiration (Foucault and Rabianow, 1984). Foucault’s concept of governmentally has received much attention which comes from its lecture. This has made the Western be a place where there is no more of authority and more repressive powers but that which has mainly focused on the productivity (Merquior, 1987). Work cited Deleuze, G., & Hand, S. 1988. Foucault. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press Foucault, M. 2001. Foucault. Foucault, M. 1965. Madness and civilization; a history of insanity in the age of reason. New York: Pantheon Books. Foucault, M., & Foucault, M. 1978. The history of sexuality. New York: Pantheon Books. Foucault, M., & Rabinow, P. 1984. The Foucault reader. New York: Pantheon Books. Foucault, M., & Mazumdar, P. 1998. Foucault. München: E. Diederichs. Merquior, J. 1987. Foucault. Berkeley: University of California Press. Nola, R. 1998. Foucault. London: F. Cass Foucault, M. 1971. The order of things: An archaeology of the human sciences. New York: Pantheon Books Koontz, H., & Donnell, C. 1980. Management 7th ed.. New York: McGraw-Hill. Stoner, J. 1982. Management 2nd ed.. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Ha Foucault, M. 1991. Foucault. Robbins, S., & Coulter, M. 2005. Management 8th ed.. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Drucker, P., & Maciariello, J. 2008. Management Rev. ed.. New York, NY: Collins. Foucault, M. 1981. The order of things Read More