Hi all,
Would it be reasonable to argue that Foucaultâ??s shift in emphasis from
bio-power to government was because the bio-political â?? at least as far as
this was discussed in the second half of the last 1976 Collège de France
lecture, and in the first half of the last chapter of The History of
Sexuality â?? was still figured in negative terms, in terms of deduction, or
repression: that is to say, that it was still enframed within the Reichean
Hypothesis? And thus that the shift to government, to political
governmentality, was an attempt to think the bio-political in terms of the
productivity and positivity of power: a productivity and positivity that
is at once biological and political?
Regards - Kevin
--
Kevin Turner
Dept. of Sociology
Cartmel College
Lancaster University
Lancaster
LA1 4YL
(01524) 594508
Would it be reasonable to argue that Foucaultâ??s shift in emphasis from
bio-power to government was because the bio-political â?? at least as far as
this was discussed in the second half of the last 1976 Collège de France
lecture, and in the first half of the last chapter of The History of
Sexuality â?? was still figured in negative terms, in terms of deduction, or
repression: that is to say, that it was still enframed within the Reichean
Hypothesis? And thus that the shift to government, to political
governmentality, was an attempt to think the bio-political in terms of the
productivity and positivity of power: a productivity and positivity that
is at once biological and political?
Regards - Kevin
--
Kevin Turner
Dept. of Sociology
Cartmel College
Lancaster University
Lancaster
LA1 4YL
(01524) 594508