For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now

Evaluation (550 words) This subjects the topic-area or thesis to critical analys
Evaluation (550 words) This subjects the topic-area or thesis to critical analysis and states a point of view supported by evidence. This is where you present an informed judgement of the strengths and weaknesses of the theoretical perspective under consideration essay topic According to Foucault, every form of knowledge is also a form of power. Discuss in relation to Foucault’s analysis of punishment. and i have already written the previous parts Introduction Knowledge and power are often regarded as two different attributes in general discussions. Power is often discussed under a political backdrop and knowledge under a pedagogical (teaching or education) backdrop. Knowledge is often discussed in an epistemological context as well. Michael Foucault was a philosopher of the 19th century whose primary work is related to ideas of civilisation, education, power, madness etc. Power and knowledge are one of their main ideas of Foucault, and he firmly believes these two things to be intricately interlinked or interdependent. His theories are primarily regarding the relationship between knowledge and power and how this relationship is effective in controlling the social control (Popkewitz and Brennon, 1997). Foucault is often labelled as structuralist and postmodernist even today, but he refuted the labels in his lifetime. He believed that as the two factors of power and knowledge are linked, it is nearly impossible to discuss one without correlating it with the second. Hence, he joined the two factors in a single concept of power/knowledge. He explains the relationship in his text and says that the knowledge is conceived in the system and networks of power that allows the conception of the knowledge. To understand the concept better, a modern example can be quoted that a well-established knowledge in the field of science can only be produced if there are enough funded institutes, private corporations, and governments, each of which has its own power structure. The power relationships in any organisation usually define the goals and objectives of the organisation (Crampton and Elden, 2007). The dynamics of power and knowledge relationship. As mentioned earlier, the power relationship between the management levels of any organisation is the defining factor of the plan of any organisation. To understand this, take the relationship between higher, middle and lower management in an organisation or the relationship between teachers, administrative staff and students at an institute. The agenda of the organisation will determine what you can do in the research domain in the organisation or institute, and it will be based on how the organisation defines the knowledge and what is allowed and not allowed in that particular organisation. The people in the hierarchy have certain beliefs they recognise as facts, and it is usually not allowed or even advised in the organisation to challenge and go against those recognised truths. This power relationship affects the knowledge and what type of knowledge is produced. It is impossible to deal with only one domain (power or knowledge) because the relationship between the two is so deep and complex. Both the ideas feed off of each other. So, whenever knowledge is discussed, it means power is automatically involved (Popkewitz and Brennon, 1997). One crucial point to understand here is that it is not only the top to down power relationship such the monarch has with his subordinates, but the power relationship can be multidirectional such as lateral, bottom to top etc. to understand this, an example of top Universities in the United Kingdom and the United States can be taken where teachers have the power over the students to influence their grades, their research choices etc. but students also evaluate the teachers and influence their careers in the organisation, so the power relationship is bidirectional. These two are not the only power relationships in the university. The relationships between students of the same class and teachers teaching the same class also have an influence on knowledge. The appraisal or ridicule of the work of students by teachers and the striving teachers to get their research proposal accepted and get published to be visible in the (Rose, 1994). Foucault was not the first one to discuss the relationship between power and knowledge. Before him, many of philosophers have described the relationship between these two factors, such as Aristotle and Plato, who believed that only those with in depth and correct knowledge of justice would be able to rule the public fairly because their knowledge would influence their power. In modern philosophy, Thomas Hobbs, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are the philosophers who used their philosophical influence for the political purposes to influence the power and shape the political reality according to their philosophies. What distinguishes the idea of Foucault is that he speaks about the deep intertwining of the power and knowledge and speaks about the interlinkage being so strong that even in theory, they are inseparable, and if you are talking about knowledge, power is automatically the subject of discussion. Other philosophers recognised the relationship between power and knowledge, but they were separable entities, but Foucault says you cannot talk about power without mentioning the knowledge systems that uphold the power. The knowledge can, on the other hand, not be discussed without keeping the power relationships (lateral and hierarchal) in view because they are the primary reason knowledge is produced. The recognition of knowledge and acceptance as truth also depends heavily on these power relationships, so these two factors cannot be discussed separately. They should be dealt with in one idea, according to Foucault (Nola, 1998). One can understand this in terms of madness. When people started getting mentally ill, it was the responsibility of physicians and medical professionals to come out with a parallel form of knowledge to cure mental diseases as they cure bodily or physical abnormalities. Knowledge is generated and accepted by those having a robust overlapping power system, and those who have any form of power (social, political, natural or academic) have it because of the knowledge they have about truth, politics and human nature in the context of culture. As mentioned earlier, many of the forms of power are social rather than political. So, in order to understand and apply the Foucault’s view of power/knowledge, one needs to understand the invisible power relationships in the organisation and consider the overlapping factors even. By understanding and discovering the implicit and hidden power relationships, one will be able to apply the notions in any system, such as political, academic and religious etc. (Jardine, 2005). People who are allowed to produce the knowledge and speak about it and those who are not allowed can do so because they are regulated by the power relationship and system. Another essential thing that Foucault makes is that it is not necessary that power influence is repressive. It can be productive and nurturing as well. The power and knowledge are not separate. Earlier, philosophers such as Sir Francis Bacon believed that power is applied knowledge means by the application of knowledge, power is wielded, but Foucault has a contradictory opinion. He says that knowledge is applied power which means by the application of power, research or knowledge is harboured. The notion of Foucault regarding power and knowledge is contradictory to the liberal notion of the truth that truth will emerge out if distortive powers are wiped out. Foucault says that truth will cease to exist without the existence of power as that is the driving source for the production of knowledge (Deacon, 2006). Foucault is consider to be very straightforward about the penal apparatus and proceeds to demonstrate a clear image of its internal operations and focusing on technologies of penal power, In his studies he is analysing in detail the mechanisms of modern penal sanctions .Foucault argues that in the modern era forms of punishment have changed as they have turned from public displays of violence and instead have turned towards a mode of power based on ‘’detailed knowledge, routine intervention, and gentle correction.’’ (Garland,1991). Thus, punishment is the ways in which power-knowledge technologies come into contact with offenders and power is exercised through and in them. what i need is the critical evaluation of the theoritical frame

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order Now