Foucaults Study of Psychology - Essay Example

?Running Head: FOUCAULT Foucault’s questioning of Previous Histories of 'Knowledge’ in relation to Criminology of the of the Institution] Foucault’s questioning of Previous Histories of 'Knowledge’ in relation to Criminology Michael Foucault, a French philosopher, is one of the most important philosophers during the late 20th century. He was born in Poitiers, France and died from AIDS in 1984. Foucault was openly gay and knew he had AIDS. Nonetheless, he never seemed bothered since he openly told his friends about his condition. In addition, Foucault continued to work tirelessly spending the last times of his life working on his work on ‘The History of Sexuality’ which he released just before his death. Foucault is the most quoted intellectual in humanities, which indicates his successful career. Foucault’s first critique of past knowledge was the paper he published for his doctorate. In this paper, Foucault abolished the separation of madness and reason into two universal categories. He established that differences made between madness and sanity are due to creation of madness in the reasoning age. He criticized Rene Descartes work on meditation and accused him of doubting everything except his own rationality. Foucault thus accuses Descartes for excluding insanity in his meditation work. Foucault challenged the modern day philosophy, which involved questioning process and acceptance of knowledge of the time. Kant later on developed philosophy to entail critique of knowledge, which is the modern day philosophy. According to Kant, innovation involved maintaining the same level of critique to reveal the human limits of knowledge in addition to revealing the conditions for this critique. This way, human cognition features such as spatial characters of objects turned to be true. Foucault challenged this Kantian reasoning by suggesting asking of questions about objects that are necessary and might be contingent instead of the reverse propagated by Kant and other philosophers. According to Turner & Elliot (2001), Foucault’s form of questioning formed the basis of social sciences such as biology, sociology and psychology (p. 4). Foucault critique of philosophy undermines traditional philosophy belief of offering scientific truth on human sciences by proving philosophy basis on historical forces. Foucault therefore challenged the rigidity of philosophy. According to him, philosophy entails doing more than just maintaining the status quo (Turner& Elliott 2001, p. 121). Foucault was able to challenge established subjects like philosophy hence appealed to many intellectuals with his intellectual critique styles. Foucault wrote about ‘History of the Present’ that although seemed contradictory, was very critical. He emphasized history arguing that what is important today has some origins in the past. To him, history of the present provided an important space for critical thinking. He referred to history as archaeology in his early works but later on, he developed it into genealogy. Through his archaeological studies, Foucault recognized the changing structures of knowledge production through practices such as art, philosophy and sciences. He established that institution power when linked with knowledge form human subjects. These subjects expose humans to disciplinary standards. To Foucault, truth is historically formed hence there is no ageless truth. Foucault book on ‘The Order of Things’ was a bestseller in his native France. This was so despite the fact that this book was Foucault’s most complex book to read. This book was a study of the development of fields such as economics and linguistic during the 18th and 19th centuries. It was in this book that Foucault predicted the end of man. He argued that the arrangement of knowledge led to the formation of the subject man through discourse. This subject, man will then eventually erase from Earth. According to Calhoun, Gerteis & Moody (2012), Foucault challenged the use of archaeology as a way of historical analysis (p. 189). This type of reasoning emanated from the idea that what is of interest to historians are only what affects present events. As a result, scholars write History from the present perspectives and therefore, History fulfils present needs. Thus, there is a relation between Foucault’s works and present events. Foucault reviewed clinical medicine in his 1963 work, ‘The Birth of the Clinic’. However, he remains silent on socio-ethical issues of clinical medicine. This is because information on clinical medicine is objectively true hence; there is less need for critique. As a result, this work by Foucault has many similarities with science history. Foucault’s study of psychology formed the basis of his work on the ‘History of Madness’. This work involved the study of the emerging mental illness in Europe at that time. The modern psychiatrists infuriated Foucault because of their moral hypocrisy. According to Foucault, the idea of the mentally ill requiring medical treatment was not an improvement of the Renaissance period perception of madness as an interaction with mysterious forces (Smart 2012, p. 40). In addition, this view was also not an improvement of the 18th Century perception of madness as a rejection of reason. Foucault therefore challenged the idea that madness was a mental disorder by suggesting that this idea was because of dubious social and ethical reasons. He further argued that the neutrality of modern treatments methods of madness were cover-ups of the challenges of controlling conventional morality in the society. In this regard, Foucault did not only challenge the perception of madness, but also the scientific madness treatment methods. Foucault attacked once again the idea of power as a suppression of something in place in his book ‘The History of Sexuality Volume 1.’ Foucault argued that it is impossible to separate the idea of sexual repression from the affiliated lure to talk about sex. He argued that humans develop certain traits in the process of abolishing their innate tendencies. He rejected the notion that modern power purposes to produce behaviours that it targets (O’Farrell 2005, p. 175). Foucault’s work on criminology in his book ‘Discipline and Punish’ provided kinder methods of punishing criminals instead of killing them (Mills 2013, p. 36). Foucault recognized the need of enlightened reforms in order to control the society but rejected the enlightenment definition of power. He agitated for a new punishment mode where schools, factories and hospitals modelled as prisons to control the entire society. Foucault believed that institutions create a new system of discipline. He criticized the current penal punishment by inflicting body harm as a historical power form taken from the army by the state during the 17th Century. According to Smart (2012), Foucault envisioned three control techniques in the disciplinary society (p. 105). These three techniques include observation, judgment normalizations and examination. Foucault argued that observation allows for control of people. Perfect observation system allows guards to identify a problem. In the absence of perfect observation, ranked observation would help to control the population where the low guards pass information to the senior officers. A key feature of disciplinary control is that it focuses on what people have failed to do, which is also referred to as non-observance. This is the failure to meet the expected standards. This illustrates the main function of disciplinary system of correcting wrong behaviours such as criminal activities. Foucault argues that the main goal of disciplinary power is not revenge but to reform individuals to live by the rules and norms of the society. Foucault differentiated normalization discipline involving imposing of norms and judicial punishment. Examination is an integral component of Foucault’s disciplinary society. This is because it combines both elements of ranked observation and normalizing judgment. According to Foucault, examination entails a combination of power and knowledge since exams control examiners’ behaviours by forcing them to study and at the same time obtains the truth from the examiners since they write what is in their minds (Mills 2013, p. 88). Examinations also subjects individuals to documentation since there is recording of exam results in documents. These documents provide information about the individuals and allow systems such as absentee records to control them. Those in control can then formulate norms that provide basis for knowledge. According to Gutting (2005), Foucault supported the Panopticon model for modern control of crimes and other unaccepted behaviours (p. 134). This entailed designing a prison containing many separate cells to ensure that each prisoner is invisible from the others. A monitor placed in a central power should then observe the inmates. The inmates will act as though they are under observation since they do not know whether they are under observation or not. This results to control of behaviour through internal observation of the inmates rather than using physical presence. Foucault had a controversial conclusion in his book that the purpose of prisons system is to yield criminality rather than reducing it. Foucault’s last two books challenges the western perception of humans as sexual beings. He examines the construction of subjectivity by analysing ancient works. He examines pleasure in the Greek systems and concludes that social position attained through sexuality derives pleasure. He analyses how self-control rule allows attainment of pleasure. Foucault concludes that it is when self-care dominates human’s subjective life that excess life becomes dangerous. Foucault therefore challenged the Christianity notion that linked pleasure with transgressions (Bernauer & Carrette 2004, p. 72). Elliot (2008) criticises Foucault work as too deterministic (p. 83). Elliot states that critics argue that Foucault work seems to suggest that dialogue and language are the only way of applying power into people’s lives. In this case, the workings of the society operate without the knowledge of the people. Another criticism levelled against Foucault’s works is that his idea of power-knowledge is too general. This is because this concept fails to illustrate the historical factors that lead to social changes in the society. However, Elliot praises Foucault contribution crime punishment and social control. Elliot states that: “Foucault’s thesis of disciplinary power has strongly influenced contemporary studies of crime, surveillance and punishment.” (Elliot 2008, p. 84) Mills (2013) elaborates Foucault’s idea on power and institutions and his challenge on Marxist thinking (p. 28). Foucault argues that there is something else more than repression in power that makes people to conform to the set rules. This positive analysis of power by Foucault makes him analyse popular revolts where individuals take power into their own hands. According to Marxism, the fundamental objective of political action was to overthrow the government through revolts and to liberate the working class. However, Foucault challenged this in his article ‘Truth and Power.’ According to Foucault, revolution is not a challenge to power nor is it a method of overthrowing those in power. Thus, the state does not poses enormous power but just a construction of relations that position people in levels that ensures the political system works. He gave the example of the French Revolution that changed certain features of the society but position people in the same manner. Mills stated that: “The notion of liberation from oppression through revolution for Foucault is one which should be treated with extreme caution.” (Mills 2013, p. 37) According to Smart (2012), Foucault favoured a shift from targeting the body to targeting the soul for punishment for crimes committed (p. 67). Foucault advocated of deprivation of individual rights and wealth as a form of punishment. However, inflicting of body harm is still applicable to date. Foucault acknowledged the reduction of penal severity over the years but was still sceptical arguing that changes in penal punishment have been more qualitative but not quantitative. Smart states that: “That is to say that key changes has concerned has concerned a displacement in the very object of the punitive operation.” (Smart 2012, p. 68) Foucault therefore challenged various histories of knowledge in different fields such as clinic medicine, power, madness and punitive punishment in criminology. His critique of conventional philosophy formed the basis of questioning in human sciences studies. He challenged the treatment of insanity by the modern psychiatrists. However, his work on disciplinary power was the most outstanding. The modern control concept provided ways of controlling behaviour and criminology. He advocated for milder punitive punishment for criminals from bodily harm to deprivation of human liberties as an effective way of controlling behaviour. References Bernauer, J & Carrette, J. (2004). Michael Foucault and Theology: The Politics Experience. Hampshire, ENG: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. Also available at: http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=oeDdpFPu-SMC&source=gbs_navlinks_s Calhoun, C., Gerteis, J., Moody, J., Pfaff, S., & Virk, I. (Eds.). (2012).Contemporary sociological theory. Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons. Also available at: http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=I_x-pc2SJX0C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false Elliot, A. (2008). Contemporary Social Theory: An Introduction. Abingdon, OX: Routledge. Also available at: http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=xuPCN8uTclAC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false Gutting, G. (2005). The Cambridge Companion to Foucault. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Also available at: http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=oaYwimWy1xkC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false Mills, S. (2013). Michael Foucault. New York, NY: Routledge. Also available at: http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=92UZ3u20mAMC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false O’ Farrell, C. (2005). O’Farrell: Michel Foucault. London: SAGE. Also available at: http://books.google.ca/books/about/O_farrell_Michel_Foucault_paper.html?id=Sqm3sdm3RTYC Smart, B. (2012). Michel Foucault. New York, NY: Routledge. Also available at: http://books.google.com.pk/books/about/Michel_Foucault.html?id=OhAiMgyMO7IC&redir_esc=y Turner, B. S., & Elliott, A. (2001). Profiles in contemporary social theory. London, SAGE. Also available at: http://books.google.com.pk/books/about/Profiles_in_contemporary_social_theory.html?id=E5t8AAAAIAAJ&redir_esc=y Read More