Professional Documents
Culture Documents
INTRODUCTION
Michel Foucault with his book entitled The History of Sexuality Volume
made mention of the four deployments namely objective, method, domain, and
periodization. Over and above, what Michel Foucault stresses here is on how
before writing the said segment in his book placed prior to it the third part
under the title of Scientia Sexualis. In the preceding part of the book,
Foucault points out how the ars erotica was converted into scientia sexualis
these so called sciences of sexuality under the disguise of care became the
will also be no power over it. As Foucault says, “Let us consider things in
erotica, our society has equipped itself with a scientia sexualis.1 But what
1
Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality Volume 1: An Introduction, (New York: Vintage Books A
Division of Random House, Inc., 1990), 67.
behavior for the benefit of the society, which as a result increases the
power. The modern disciplinary society made use of the body as the means of
control. What exactly this means is by suppressing the body via its sexuality
words, the more that the body is suppressed or subjected to control, the more
source of getting the truth. While in the case of the ars truth is drawn from
and the forbidden, nor by reference to a criterion of utility, but first and
reverberations in the body and the soul.2 Again, these conversion and
Michel Foucault is just implying that all these are in accord to the
propagation and installment of power over and above every individual in the
society. It is all about power relations which in its barest sense power-
controlling we know.
attention is the method. Primarily, in the opening page of the section Michel
this point of view, Foucault ushered everyone to the point that at a certain
2
Ibid., 57.
3
Ibid., 93.
extent the assertion of power transcends our awareness. As we once again hear
certain strength we are endowed with; it is the name that one attributes to a
following pages of his book even made a further discussion of the concept of
relations. Moving much more ahead, he made mention that there is no power
also stressed that when there is power, there is resistance, and yet, or
relation to power.6
mentioned rule by Foucault is the coming into the fore of the panopticon. In
general the mastery of the flesh, the person especially the child or I would
say anyone else by being watched after by other individuals like teachers,
4
Ibid., 93.
5
Ibid., 95.
6
Ibid., 95.
surveillance of ones behaviors in the end. For example, in schools, the
behavior of students that in the duration of the process the students will
connection, at the early stage what serves as the panopticon are the
teachers, nurses, parents and anyone whose attention are placed at any
sexuality simultaneously the sexuality of the adults are also put into
surveillance and the exercise of power-knowledge are not exhibited only upon
the individual child but including also the people surrounding him or her.
Somehow this concept gives a profound meaning to the local parlance that
goes: “The child is the mirror of the people surrounding him or her”. In
individuals surrounding him, so, whoever be the child in his/her later years
child to the adults surrounding him/her where the sexuality, as Foucault say,
of the adults is also put into question. In the long run, it means that the
scope of power is much even wider and covers everyone, which means everyone
ask, if one still has his/her freedom? Or is freedom after all an illusion
and a mere play of words because whether one likes it or not the exercise of
power over and above him/her is definitely not optional and excuses no one?
to cut off all relationships, since power exhibits in relationships? But this
notion somehow sounds antithetical. The removal and cutting off of all
man can live like an island, that is, totally alone. As Aristotle would say,
“Man is a social animal”. Nevertheless, how can one escape from the dominion
and grip of power, if man wants to be totally free at all? On the other hand,
the fourth rule of the tactical polyvalence of discourses made mention of the
it, but also undermines and exposes it, renders it fragile and makes it
segments whose tactical function is neither uniform nor stable.8 This notion
utilized by the Roman Catholic Church from which Foucault found a strong
being extracted and the process of extracting the truth through it places
both the inquirer and the inquired at the mercy of the conversation. In this
Hermeneutics and a thinker prior to Foucault, had thought the same thing as
Foucault did when it comes to how powerful and strategical the discourse in
determining and obtaining the truth. Furthermore, Gadamer noted that as far
7
Ibid., 101.
8
Ibid., 100.
9
Language is a pre-given variable in any discourse or conversation and it is the only medium of
communication in a conversation.
conversation/discourse is liken to a play by Gadamer) is obviously not the
the issue of discourse of Foucault, both the inquirer and the inquired are
totally absorbed by the discourse due to the phenomenon that the discourse
takes priority over the subjects within the dialogue. Ultimately, Foucault
that the sexuality of adults (especially those who are surrounding the child
themselves are called into question.11 Moreover, the case of care here that
emerges between the relationship of the child and the people surrounding him
parents, etc. might be giving out the impression that they care for the
growth of the child but what really lurks behind is the goal of controlling
is the same thing with the seminary where psychology is employed intensively,
of the seminary, etc. all is set for a singular vision, that is, to produce a
docile body in the disguise of an ideal priest. Consequently, once the docile
triumphantly achieved.
This dominion of power to the body (as what we nowadays call the
science of the body) denotes not only the inevitable nature of the power-
10
Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method, (London: Sheed and Ward Ltd., 1988), 93.
11
Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality Volume 1: An Introduction, (New York: Vintage Books A
Division of Random House, Inc., 1990), 99.
CONCLUSION
Knowledge as what Foucault says when linked to power not only assumes
the authority of the truth but has the power to make itself true. All
knowledge, once applied in the real world, has effects, and in that sense at
least, becomes true. Knowledge once used to regulate the conduct of others,
knowledge, nor any knowledge that does not presuppose and constitute at the
the modern society and so are main contenders for the genealogical analysis.
That there is not only a control being exercised through others’ knowledge of
the individual person but that there is also a control through the
philosophical maxim that upon having the right knowledge of the object there
simply means that they are not only controlled as object of the disciplinary
Thus, its domination over human beings makes it invincible for whether we
penetrates the realm of the internal and leaves everyone out of guard and
Whether one is educated or not, sane or insane, still one must submit to the
thinking that their insanity provides them the license to escape from the
grip of power-knowledge relations but not at all. It is because the more that
they are denied of their sanity, the more that they are being confined within
the grip of it via the issuance of control over their abnormal behavioral
they have. Even if one is uneducated like those who live in the cave, still
by the fact that they live in a cave already means that their behavior is
regulated. Isn’t it that the cave already serves as their own panopticon and
nature, on the other hand, is but another panopticon which commands them to
one is properly sane and excessively intelligent, still he/she is not excused
Nevertheless, only in death where the person gets rid of the power-knowledge
relations because death means only one thing: the end of all relationships.
does not exist and amounts to no effect. It also seems for me that resistance
after all is a metaphorical word we use in language. On the other hand, the
knowledge, knowledge only means power and power only means knowledge.
Lastly, I will reecho what was noted earlier, “In knowing you control,