Foucault was writing before social media. His examples were schools, prisons, hospitals and factories. Today social media amplifies almost every mechanism he described. Visibility becomes constant, surveillance becomes participatory, judgment is immediate and self monitoring becomes continuous. The Panopticon has become decentralized. AI may be turning it into something even more powerful. More Matrix then the prison Foucault imagined.
Interesting, but a little overblown. I don't believe most people discipline themselves to meet someone else's ideals. On the contrary, I question whether people nowadays have much self-discipline at all. But I suppose that is a different topic.
Foucault’s thesis sounds suspiciously like Freud’s concept of Superego - self governance that derives from socialization.
This precisely why I have a problem with so called philosophers - people who, in trying to sound wise, merely recycle others’ ideas and slap new labels on them.
Having said that, the worldview supposedly proposed by Foucault and supported by this author, exemplifies the problem we have in the world today - anarchy, dressed in the mantle of liberalism and free thought.
Hence, while I do not advance blind acquiescence to senseless authoritarianism, I do not believe that we as a species can survive, if there is no structure, i.e., rules that guide how human beings behave in a civilized society, pursuant to common good.
Those who are advocating anarchic mindsets now, seem to forget that we probably would not have accomplished what we have today or survived thus far, without everyone pitching on on behalf of everyone, rather than acting selfishly without regard for the wider community.
No man is an Island. We all need each other to survive. We need rules. We need structure. We need socialization - because human beings evolved to influence each other, hence community, family, social groups, etc.
If society is to function, thoughts and actions cannot not be influenced by other elements of the ecosystem where we exist. And anyone that does not understand this might as well relocate to a remote island, where they can act and think completely independently, without others influencing their thoughts and actions, because that is the only way, the thesis being advanced by this author can ever be feasible.
The question is that the freedom we have chosen, is it really our own choice? or is it borrowed from the society? If it borrowed, then where is my individuality? Why I need to be tamed and deciplined? But contrary to this living in a society and choosing your own way, that's to me is real freedom.
Foucault was writing before social media. His examples were schools, prisons, hospitals and factories. Today social media amplifies almost every mechanism he described. Visibility becomes constant, surveillance becomes participatory, judgment is immediate and self monitoring becomes continuous. The Panopticon has become decentralized. AI may be turning it into something even more powerful. More Matrix then the prison Foucault imagined.
Interesting, but a little overblown. I don't believe most people discipline themselves to meet someone else's ideals. On the contrary, I question whether people nowadays have much self-discipline at all. But I suppose that is a different topic.
Foucault’s thesis sounds suspiciously like Freud’s concept of Superego - self governance that derives from socialization.
This precisely why I have a problem with so called philosophers - people who, in trying to sound wise, merely recycle others’ ideas and slap new labels on them.
Having said that, the worldview supposedly proposed by Foucault and supported by this author, exemplifies the problem we have in the world today - anarchy, dressed in the mantle of liberalism and free thought.
Hence, while I do not advance blind acquiescence to senseless authoritarianism, I do not believe that we as a species can survive, if there is no structure, i.e., rules that guide how human beings behave in a civilized society, pursuant to common good.
Those who are advocating anarchic mindsets now, seem to forget that we probably would not have accomplished what we have today or survived thus far, without everyone pitching on on behalf of everyone, rather than acting selfishly without regard for the wider community.
No man is an Island. We all need each other to survive. We need rules. We need structure. We need socialization - because human beings evolved to influence each other, hence community, family, social groups, etc.
If society is to function, thoughts and actions cannot not be influenced by other elements of the ecosystem where we exist. And anyone that does not understand this might as well relocate to a remote island, where they can act and think completely independently, without others influencing their thoughts and actions, because that is the only way, the thesis being advanced by this author can ever be feasible.
Very Nice!!
A sentence for a sentence
Depression of circumstances
Demanded expression
I take my chances
Over reach monitors my
Unfree speach
Taped lip tongue stilled
Vitriolic pain filled
Prises poetry and prose
From a worn bitter inside
A Thought arose subtle roast
I reached out put out a post
Your take on Foucault resonates with the work of Byung Chul Han, in particular his short incisive book, The Burnout Society.
The question is that the freedom we have chosen, is it really our own choice? or is it borrowed from the society? If it borrowed, then where is my individuality? Why I need to be tamed and deciplined? But contrary to this living in a society and choosing your own way, that's to me is real freedom.