Panopticon: The Ideal Social Order "The Panopticon is a marvelous machine which, whatever use one may wish to put it to, produces homogenous effects of power." Panopticism is a style of controlling the individual and making him conform to the system. That system could refer to the police or the world as a whole. There is never a definite top position, therefore, everyone feels as if they are being monitored by someone else. It is for this reason that this disciplinary mechanism is so effective.
The same happens in society. There are rules we must fo... ... middle of paper ... ...a that William Golding was working with in this book. People are the reason society doesn't always work. No matter how much we would like, society's faults cannot be blamed on any one individual. Golding's quote says that our defects are directly linked to the defects of society.
Till this day, society fails to notice the significance of ‘differences’ for understanding inequality. As members of society, we need to understand the role that one plays in reinforcing both differences and inequality. I argue that inequalities have been institutionalized causing for the “social construction of our reality”. The dominating power has created a reality of ourselves, the perspective of others, and the creation of the environment. Foucault's theory explains how power is exercised and submerged within the whole society, realizing that there are no limitations when it comes to executing power.
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.
This model consist of thoughts and ideas, not the conditions and material forces. After the Cold War realism’s approach to the security was challenged. These assumptions argue that, the world is shaped socially, thank to unlimited feelings and interactions of all structures, and factors are automatically determined; as evenly factors such as the ideas, norms and views are fundamental for politics to function. What distinguishes constructivism and realism is the approach to safety. For realists security is the key and that it is developed by political elites and due to Wendt, it is self-interest actions.
Similarly, "The Chrysalids" may pose a similar warning, but I feel it is rather a reflection on the recognition of the bigotry and narrow-mindedness of the world which will perhaps never change. In conclusion, it is obvious that both Atwood in "The Handmaids Tale" and Wyndham in "The Chrysalids" employ a variety of methods in order to reinforce the level of control inflicted in each society. The regimes use violent and cruel methods, positioning people at a lower level by dehumanisation in order to take complete control. Atwood and Wyndham express the nature of power-hungry elites in the extent of their use of shocking and disturbing methods to control their inferiors. Word count: 2, 994
In sociology, power is often defined as the capability of an individual or set of individuals to achieve their desired outcomes and to enforce their ideas. Power involves the aptitude to influence as well as control how others behave, whether it be against their own freewill or persuading them to behave a certain way without them knowing. Power can be divided into three subcategories known as obedience to authority, manipulation, and coercion. Obedience to authority refers to the phenomena of citizens blindly following orders of authority figures. Manipulation refers to the devious influences over others; getting to act a certain way without them knowing that was your intention.
Critical theorists such as Karl Marx and Jürgen Habermas are critics of unequal social conditions specifically groups that are excluded from power or from free access to information. Thus, critical theorists do more than observe, interpret or describe; they criticize. Looking through the power structure research lens, this theory helped the researcher by asking who benefits from the unequal distribution of power and who are they taking advantage of by focusing on the community issue. In communication, critical scholars have focused on the role of communication in society and on the control of communication... ... middle of paper ... ...cal dimension” of his work (Dreyfus & Rabinow, 1982, p. 114). He claims that power and knowledge are not external to each other, but that they operate in a mutually generative fashion, as “nothing can exist as an element of knowledge if [...] it does not possess the effects of coercion” and as “nothing can function as a mechanism of power if it is not deployed according to procedures, instruments, means, and objectives which can be validated in more or less coherent systems of knowledge” (Foucault, 1997, p. 52).
They are the teachers of immorality and by testing boundaries, they are actually showing where exactly the boundaries are in society. Tricksters “often do things backward, out of order, or in reverse order” (Christen 8). By acting on impulse and for selfish reasons, they are testing boundaries while simultaneously creating them. Boundaries don’t exist until someone tests them and reveals them. Without tricksters who are opportunists and hunger driven manipulators, society would have no bounds.
Critique in Critical theory involves observing the disruption and conflict that causes for struggle within a society. To Horkheimer, Traditional theory lacks the ability to promote change. In fact, maintaining the status quo is the only thing Traditional Theory focuses on. This theory is designed to be a quick response to society. Although it is projected to capture the core of knowledge, the concept actually focuses on the advancement of production.