Michel Foucault is one of the most elusive and influential thinkers in the 20th century, and his influence was felt in different disciplines. One of the areas where his ideas and thoughts immortalized his contribution is in sociology. The application of Foucauldian principles in sociology have had a profound effect on the discipline. His epistemology led to novel interpretations in both philosophy and history. Under the method of philosophical analysis and genealogical study, Foucault’s idea of Panopticon has become one of the most iconic ways of understanding the society. The panoptic model encourages people to analyze the significance of the analysis of social control and socialization along other conceits of sociology. Even though his theories and ideas were rarely applied in American sociology, this paper will highlight the relevance of Foucault’s theories in the study of social organizations. Some of the main concepts which are discussed in the paper include discourse, power/knowledge, discipline, and governmentality.
Discourse
Foucault had revolutionary ideas about social organizations. However, one of the areas he explored when studying the social world was discourse. His interest on discourse was centered on how it defines reality in a social sphere. He was also interested in establishing the ideas, things, and people that existed in such a reality ( Fox, 1998) . For the thinker, discourse can be defined as an institutionalized manner of writing and speaking about the reality that determines what can be said and thought intelligibly and what is not permissible in the social world. For example, he uses the sensitive topic of sexuality to show how the society had changed how people think about pleasure, their innermost selves, and desire ( Gutting, 2005) . Using the history of sexuality, Foucault explored the common practice, but showed how the attitudes and conceptions of the discussion about sex had changed and how it influenced the society. What previously seemed to be a taboo subjected in the previous societies was now being discussed without fear of being socially awkward. The conception of discourse by Foucault is plying out in the current generation whereby conversations about homosexuality and transgenderism are becoming more mainstream. Such topics were previously deemed to be inappropriate. According to Foucault, the changing discourse about human sexuality did not uncover any preexisting truth about the identity of humans ( Fox, 1998) . Instead it contributed in its creation through the practices and principles of the power/knowledge paradigm. Therefore, choosing to discuss sensitive topics on human sexuality brings certain knowledge to the fore, resulting in a changes in the ideas and thoughts of a society.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Power/Knowledge
According to Foucault, knowledge and power should not be considered to be two different entities. Instead, the two concepts are related inextricably. Foucault argues that knowledge is a form of exercising power ( Gutting, 2005) . On the other hand, power is considered to be a function of knowledge. The two reinforce each other in a circular fashion whereby as one observes the society more, he or she becomes more powerful, and more power reinforces knowledge causing an increase in both. Therefore, the two exist interdependently and the most famous example used by the thinker was highlighted in the confessions in the History of Sexuality ( Fox, 1998) . Even though confessions were a preserve of the church particularly in the earlier eras. Confessions were an example of the church’s dominance over the congregants. The church used its power in the form of confessions, to obtain knowledge. The people who attend the confessions are compelled to tell the truth. Some of the sensitive topics which are explored include emotions, dispositions, and sexual desires among others. It is through confessions that the premise that sexual identity is considered to be a core of human self emerged ( McKinlay & Starkey, 1998) . The meant that it influenced how the society created identities, monitored and controlled the identities based on the accepted discourse.
Foucault stated that power comes from and exists from everywhere. Therefore, there was a possibility that a complex strategy can be used to shape human behavior. However, the thinker did not view power negatively since it was seen as a producer of the reality. The Panopticon was a metaphor used by Foucault to determine the relationships between people in a disciplinary environment and social control and the power/knowledge concept ( Gutting, 2005) . According to the thinker, knowledge and power can be gained by observing others. He stated that there was a clear transition to disciplinary power with each event or movement recorded and supervised respectively. When people accept surveillance, they show an acceptance of rules and regulations and docility, which can also be interpreted as some normalization stemming from the fear of discipline. In this context, suitable behavior is achieved through panoptic discipline as opposed to total surveillance. When a population internalizes their reality, they are able to remain disciplined.
Even though power/knowledge paradigm was constructive, it can also be restrictive. It can be used to limit what people can do, say, and how they act despite the fact that it provides new ways of thinking and acting by ourselves. For example, some societies are still considering discourse about homosexuality to be offensive and unacceptable ( Lloyd & Thacker, 1997) . Since the people in power control the discourse, they control the way of thinking in that society, and it requires people to go against the grain so that the can live according to their values and beliefs, as opposed to conforming to the norms in the society.
Discipline
Another interesting concept by Foucault was on discipline. The thinker argued that discipline was a mechanism used by those in power to control the behaviors and thoughts of the social actors subtly. It is a stark contrast to the brute and overt show of power usually exhibited by institutions such as the monarchy and governments among other sovereign forces. Foucault states that discipline works when social spaces are controlled. For example, institutions such as schools and prisons are used to instill discipline in the society ( Fox, 1998) . Time is also seen as a means of control, since it is used to determine the times people should be in and out of some social spaces. An employee has times to clock in and clock out of work at specific times in most conventional jobs. Surveillance is not also uncommon in the society. Even in the current democratic societies, governments are still using surveillance to control the society. Foucault gives a clear example of this fact in Discipline and Punish ( Fox, 1998) . He argues in this work that the contemporary society is a disciplinary one, meaning that discipline is ensured and regulated through various institutions such as the military, schools, prisons, and hospitals.
Governmentality
Foucault continue to uncover different concepts even in the later stages of his life. For example, his later work was used to explore the significance of the government in the society. Foucault reminds the society that governmentality cannot be reduced to state politics only since there was an art involved in the process. Governmentality involves a wide range persons and objects including entire populations and other abstract levels that go up to the micro level. However, in the modern times, governments were larger scale in nature. As a result, the focus of Foucault shifted to how governments were interested in controlling conduct and managing populations. One interesting concept put forward by the thinker was that unlike disciplinary power, governmentality is not focused on providing training for individuals, but rather it depended on biopower, which can be described as the procedures, policies, and regulations that are used to manage issues such as deaths, births, health, reproduction, and illness in the society.
Conclusion
The revolutionary ideas presented by Foucault showed how the human society shifts from sovereignty to nonviolent coercion. By looking at different institutions of the human society, the thinker is able encourage the society to think on how socialization occurs and its consequences. For example, he shows how governments use social control to maintain their hold over large populations. From the significance of discourse to the interaction between power and knowledge, Foucault successfully shows how social control works and how the modern society is affected by the concept. His ideas and insights encourage the society to be more introspective about the world they live in and the reality. Even though there was some level of skepticism about the ideas of Foucault, his unique style of thinking has shaped social theory and his thoughts are still relevant in the modern society.
References
Fox, N, J. (1998). Foucault, Foucauldians and Sociology. The British Journal of Sociology
Gutting, G. (2005). Foucault: A very short introduction . Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Lloyd, M., & Thacker, A. (1997). The impact of Michel Foucault on the social sciences and humanities .
McKinlay, A., & Starkey, K. (1998). Foucault, management and organization theory: From panopticon to technologies of self . London: SAGE Vol. 49, No. 3. pp. 415-433.
