Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
michel foucault 500 word essay
Michel foucault philosophy
surveillance technology
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: michel foucault 500 word essay
In Michael Foucault’s “Discipline and Punish”, the late eighteen century English philosopher Jeremy Bentham's model of Panopticon was illustrated as a metaphor for the contemporary technologies of mass surveillance.
Originally derived from the measures to control “abnormal beings” against the spreading of a plague, the Panopticon is an architecture designed to induce power with a permanent sense of visibility. With a tower in the center, surrounded by cells, the prisoners can be monitored and watched at any given time from the central tower. The goal of this architectural plan was to strip away any privacy and therefore create fear induced self-regulation amongst the prisoners, with an unverifiable gaze - The prisoners can never identify when and by whom they are being observed from the tower.
In Foucault’s analysis, the concept of Panopticon is developed based on the manipulation of knowledge and power as two coexisting events. He believes that knowledge is obtained through the process of observation and examination in a system of panopticon. This knowledge is then used to regulate the behaviors and conduct of others, creating an imbalance in power and authority. Not only can knowledge create power, power can also be used to define knowledge where the authority can create “truth”. This unbalance of knowledge and power then marks a loss of power for the ends being watched, resulting in an unconditional acceptance of regulations and normalization.
In this sense, self-regulation and normalized behaviors can be achieved through imposed threat and fear of punishments and discipline. With every movement supervised and all events recorded in a system of total surveillance, violence is no longer a necessary component of social...
... middle of paper ...
...cipline and Punish." SparkNotes. SparkNotes, n.d. Web. 10 Mar. 2014. .
"Find Renjie_charles_gu and his friends on Twoo." Renjie Gu blog on Netlog. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Mar. 2014. .
"Reactions to Global surveillance." Surveillance and society. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Mar. 2014. .
"Surveillance." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 10 Mar. 2014. .
"Surveillance." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 3 Sept. 2014. Web. 10 Mar. 2014. .
"The Surveillance Society." K. A. Taipale: (Omniveillance). N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Mar. 2014. .
In “Panopticism” Foucault states, “the major effect of the Panopticon: to induce in the inmate a state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power” (Foucault, pg. 201). The function of the Panopticon is to keep the prisoners orderly by instilling fear inside of them, this fear forces them to stay in their cells, and to remain compliant. The Panopticon is a building designed for surveillance.
Perhaps no other event in modern history has left us so perplexed and dumbfounded than the atrocities committed by Nazi Germany, an entire population was simply robbed of their existence. In “Our Secret,” Susan Griffin tries to explain what could possibly lead an individual to execute such inhumane acts to a large group of people. She delves into Heinrich Himmler’s life and investigates all the events leading up to him joining the Nazi party. In“Panopticism,” Michel Foucault argues that modern society has been shaped by disciplinary mechanisms deriving from the plague as well as Jeremy Bentham’s Panopticon, a structure with a tower in the middle meant for surveillance. Susan Griffin tries to explain what happened in Germany through Himmler’s childhood while Foucault better explains these events by describing how society as a whole operates.
However, there are other critiques that take a different approach on the oppression that exists in the novel. In "Urban Panopticism And Heterotopic Space In Kafka 's Der Process And Orwell 's Nineteen Eighty-Four,” Raj Shah argues that the way in which society in novel is oppressed is not an obvious oppression but one that focuses on constant surveillance. He uses Foucault’s arguments on panopticism to describe this. Shah states, “Foucault neologizes panopticism to describe a form of power relying not on overt repression, but rather upon the continuous surveillance of a population and the consequent strict regulation of the body” (703). He explains it is the constant surveillance that strips individuals of their rights and places them under oppression. He goes on to
Jeremy Bentham, a leading English prison reformer of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, developed an architectural plan for an ideal prison that he called the Panopticon. Such a prison would consist of a ring of individual cells encircling an observation tower. Each of the cells would open toward the tower and be illuminated by its own outside window. So, by the effect of backlighting, a single guard in the observation tower could keep watch on many prisoners--each of whom would be individually confined--without himself being seen. And because the prisoners could not see their supervisors, they would have to assume that they were being watched at all times--even if they were not. The Panopticon was designed to maximize the power of a dominating, overseeing gaze upon a transparent society of inmates. The purpose of the Panopticon was not so much to punish wrongdoers as to prevent wrongdoing by immersing prisoners in a field of total visibility in the expectation that the possibility of constant surveillance would serve to restrain the inmates (Foucault, 1980). Such surveillance would be aimed toward the interiorization of the supervisor's gaze so that each prisoner would, in effect, become his/her own overseer. Thus, through self-policing, surveillance would become permanent and pervasive in its effects--even if it was not continuously exercised.
Moving away from Foucault and Bentham, David Lyon has made a quest for other surveillance theories. He writes, “It seems clear that some constructive contributions to surveillance theory are needed. Surveillance theory cannot ignore the panopticon but it can surely move beyond it” (12). The direction as to where to turn is still an ongoing debate. Some have not strayed far and have turned to Foucault’s governmentality, others have turned to an Orwellian model, Deleuze, Baudrillard, Zizek, Arendt and Kant to name a few. This paper will turn to Henri Lefebvre and his book Production of Space as Lefebvre has become in vogue in surveillance theory and later in this paper will be useful in discussing helicopters and how occupy Mike Davis’s idea of Los Angeles creation of a ‘defensible space’.
(Flynn 1996, 28) One important aspect of his analysis that distinguishes him from the predecessors is about power. According to Foucault, power is not one-centered, and one-sided which refers to a top to bottom imposition caused by political hierarchy. On the contrary, power is diffusive, which is assumed to be operate in micro-physics, should not be taken as a pejorative sense; contrarily it is a positive one as ‘every exercise of power is accompanied by or gives rise to resistance opens a space for possibility and freedom in any content’. (Flynn 1996, 35) Moreover, Foucault does not describe the power relation as one between the oppressor or the oppressed, rather he says that these power relations are interchangeable in different discourses. These power relations are infinite; therefore we cannot claim that there is an absolute oppressor or an absolute oppressed in these power relations.
According to David Lyon in his introduction “The search for surveillance theories”, “The panopticon refuses to go away.” (4). The prison architecture invented by Jeremy Bentham became the crucial ‘diagram’ for Foucault. It places an emphasis on self-discipline as the archetypical modern mode, replacing the previous coercive and brutal methods – “it reverses the principle of the dungeon; or rather its three functions – to enclose, to deprive light, and to hide – it preserves only the first and eliminates the other two” (Foucault 200). In 1975, Foucault coined the term ‘panopticism’ in his book Discipline and Punish, which quickly became used to describe Bentham’s utilitarian theory as a whole. However, there has been much debate amongst Bentham scholars as to whether Bentham would have appreciated Foucault’s interpretation of the Panoptic. Philip Schofield writes, “It would have seemed very odd to Bentham, who regarded his Panopticon prison as humane, and an enormous improvement on the practice of the criminal justice system of the time” (qtd. in Ernst-Brunon 2-3). This discrepancy between an increasingly attractive Bentham and a still repulsive Panopticon is largely to be attributed to Foucault. If Foucault’s interpretation of the Pantopticon has made Bentham’s work known to a wider audience, conversely it has also turned Bentham into a forerunner of Big Brother. Bentham scholars have consistently lamented Bentham’s bad name among the general public and Foucault’s hand in the matter.
Michel Foucault's "Panopticism" is based on the architectural concept of the panopticon. Foucault extended this concept to create a new sort of authority and disciplinary principle. His idea was that of the anonymous watchers hold in and has the power to influence the ones being watched. This concept is two fold – it is subject to the person being watched not being able to know when they are being watched and to the rules of society places on individuals on how they should act in a given situation. This idea can be applied to every day life, like how we set up testing rooms for students or when reading literary works such as Dracula by Bram Stoker. In Dracula, there are power differentials caused by a character or characters "seeing" what others do not and caused by societal constructions.
Prisons act as a total institution where inmates are put on a strict schedule and fall under one of the most gruesome forms of social control. Because of this, many inmates rebel resulting in prisons having to increase security and impose stricter punishments. As a result of this, less effort has been put into helping mentally ill inmates. The term panopticon, coined by Bentham illustrates the concept that the prison design would allow guards to see into cells but not allowing prisoners to see out. Thus, this would allow guards to have omniscient power over the inmates. Fortunately, this never worked as a prison, however prison has created a type of mental health panopticon. This allows for mentally ill parents to feel like they are always being observed; similarly to that of an experiment. Despite prisons best attempt to equally serve all inmates to the best of their ability, prioritizing security and punishment has lead to a mental health panopticon. As a result, prisons environments have exacerbated negative behaviours, created an inhumane environment for prisoners and lack the means to aid in mental health.
The theory of Panopticon by Foucault can be applied in this poem. According to Foucault, there is a cultural shift from the old traditional discipline of inmates to a European disciplinary system (314). In this new disciplinary model, the prisoners always assume that they are under constant watch by the guards and they start policing themselves. Panopticon is the process of inducing inmates to a state of conscious and ...
Foucault once stated, “Our society is one not of spectacle, but of surveillance; under the surface of images, one invests” (301). By this, he means that our society is full of constant supervision that is not easily seen nor displayed. In his essay, Panopticism, Foucault goes into detail about the different disciplinary societies and how surveillance has become a big part of our lives today. He explains how the disciplinary mechanisms have dramatically changed in comparison to the middle ages. Foucault analyzes in particular the Panopticon, which was a blueprint of a disciplinary institution. The idea of this institution was for inmates to be seen but not to see. As Foucault put it, “he is the object of information, never a subject in communication”(287). The Panopticon became an evolutionary method for enforcing discipline. Today there are different ways of watching people with constant surveillance and complete control without anyone knowing similar to the idea of the Panopticon.
In Michel Foucault’s Discipline and Punish, he examines the role of the panopticon in the prison system in the eighteenth century. The panopticon was a method to maintain power and to ensure good conduct amongst prisoners. The panopticon is described as a central tower where one in power can oversee the surrounding area. Surrounding the center tower are cells containing prisoners. The inmates aren’t able to communicate with one another. Also, the prisoners are unable to distinguish whether it is a guard on duty watching their every move. The architectural design of the panopticon gives guards or those in power the upper hand. As a result of the prisoners being unable to determine whether someone ...
In his book titled Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Michel Foucault explores the beginning of the modern-day prison system and the culture of surveillance that it has created. Foucault argues that the modern penal system is one that executes mental and psychological punishment w...
Michel Foucault’s essay, “Panopticism”, links to the idea of “policing yourself” or many call it panopticon. The panopticon is a prison which is shaped like a circle with a watchtower in the middle. The main purpose of the panopticon was to monitor a large group of prisoners with only few guards in the key spot. From that key spot, whatever the prisoners do they can be monitored, and they would be constantly watched from the key spot inside the tower. The arrangement of panopticon is done in excellent manner that the tower’s wide windows, which opened to the outside and kept every cell in 360-degree view. The cells were designed so it makes impossible for the prisoners to glances towards the center. In short, none of the prisoners were able to see into the tower. The arrangement of cells guaranteed that the prisoner would be under constant surveillance. This is the beauty of the panopticon that anyone can glance at the cells from the tower but no prisoners can see the tower. The prisoners may feel like someone is watching, and know the he or she is powerless to escape its watch, but the same time, the guard in the tower may not be looking at the prisoners. Just because the prisoners think that someone is watching them, they will behave properly.
At this point we can determine the purpose of Foucault’s question, “what is critique”? Foucault’s definition of critique provides a tool to find cracks in power-knowledge relationships by analyzing the genealogy of a power knowledge relationship. Foucault states “we have to deal with something whose stability, deep rootedness and foundation is never such that we cannot in one way or another envisage, if not its disappearance, then at least identifying by what and from what its disappearance is possible” (65). Foucault believes that using his method of critique a power and knowledge relationship is not permanent. Questioning and knowledge can be used to remove the leash from authority.