Power Knowledge Modern Society

This essay explains the relationship between power and knowledge in Foucault concept of discourse. Nowadays, the thinkers have different ideas to understand modern society and how do they relate to the way we think. There are some thinkers having the same agreement to this subject, but on the other hand, some thinkers have different opinions and perspectives. Thus, it becomes harder to get a clear idea about the context of thinking, which creates a power that controls us. From this point of view, the French philosopher Michel Foucault discusses this issue in the context of a discourse of power related to society. Foucault is one of the most prominent modern thinkers, who has lived through a crucial period, and at the same time, the structuralism was at the centre of power. Foucault reveals the elements of his structural style, which is difficult to define. For those seeking to delve deeper into this subject, exploring the philosophy dissertation help can offer valuable insights.

Moreover, the discussion of power and control directly affects his philosophy. In the following sections, the discussion focuses on how Foucault is exploring the meaning of the discourse, through the concept of power, which he describes as the concept of power and its correlation with knowledge. In the second section, Foucault’s discourse of power and knowledge will be applied to the form of Opera music, as an example to show how the power has an essential role to the way of producing music as well.

Discourse is related to the Foucault concept to describe a social relation, that gives a speech, language and representation to categorise the world. Furthermore, discourse is not a unified thought, it is not a form of individual expiration, but discourse causes what an individual said in a different way. Although he argues that, knowledge is not based on thing except, but it is based on what is possible to think or say. Moreover, discourse is a particular way of speaking in the social system, which determinates all possibility statements, which can make in a given field in a specific historical movement. In other words, it has been defined as what we say, and we can do. In this point of view, discourse represents the social knowledge to understand a particular culture.

In the book Representation by Stuart Hall, argues Foucault’s general approach to the meaning of representation, and explains how Foucault examines the construction of knowledge, which is not just about the linguistic meaning, rather than the context that changes the meaning of the language. Moreover, the context changes depending on culture and time. (Hall, 2000 p.42-43)

From this perspective, the discourse is more than language, and more than meaning depending on the context, which represents and defines the knowledge of people. It makes a hierarchical system of knowledge that denies other peoples in a different period.

In modern sociality, power seems an external control, where some of the power is external, but the dangers of knowledge about external control are weak. In other words, the power outside can be changed with the revelation or a human can be aware of the negative side of this power, and it can be complaining. In contrast to the outside power, the internal or inside power is more dangerous, but an individual is not concerned about that. Nevertheless, Foucault

explains that, several individualities describe the concept of power; therefore, power is not something that can be learnt or controlled. However, the relations established by the Authority with different types of mental development, which is not present in the outside of an individual.

When Foucault describes the term truth and reality, he mentioned that, power exercised through the knowledge that individual can appearance through their strategies and rule of power and employment patterns.

Foucault emphasised those relations, which are practised in society. Moreover, in these practices, authority manifested in any relationship between the ruler and the place, and he gives a similar example to the authoritarian doctor who knows, by exercising his authority over the patient,

Foucault describes the idea through the prisoner, but he does not mean that the presenter is free because every intuition has a rule, which means that, every rule was internalising from the first day, that individual attend the place and after that, every individual follows the rule without discussion.

Moreover, the power use as disciplinaries and punish, in one hand, punish is one way that can control people through the rule of punishment, which is outside, where the power can control this. On the other hand, disciplinary power is not free, because it is controlled by internal though social structure, that knowledge owns the mind and also have power. The society and culture are one part of the organisation that have structure. Moreover, the individual started to imitate and learn about a culture and try to accept the rule, they have in their culture. Moreover, disciplinary power is a harmful system, that affects every individual through the knowledge, that they follow the system of culture. In other words, the rule that normalised by the institution, that cannot be dubitable.

“Disciplinary power was a significant force in shaping the historical developments of modern western nation-states.” (Schirato, Danaher, Webb. 2012 p.85)

Foucault explains those rules that, internal in an individual is effective for the organisation in order to control the way of thinking. However, he demonstrates how social change has resulted from external to domestic domination. Although, it is possible to define power as an internalisation of rules and also the regime of discipline that creates a subject.

Opera as a word is Italian, which means composition since that opera became a form of music performance. This form is started first in Italy, later in Germany, French and England. For instance, an opera performance is not just music; however, in this form of performance include poetry, dance, fashion, song, decoration and all kind of art and design.

Opera in the history used for the high class propose in their salon for entertainment and also for the wedding. However, this system has alienated human as a class status. Moreover, this system affects the form of opera also that have the hierarchs’ power to dominate public and classify them through their attending opera. Moreover, Dror Feiler an Israel, Swedish composer in an interview had Quoted from Jan le Rond d’Alembert’s pamphlet, 1752.

He mentioned that, if we want to change the monarchy, we should change the opera. This essence of his argument confirms the view that, opera has a power that cannot be changed, and it is disciplinary power of hierarchy and also no changeable in order to keep the form as it is. Moreover, the evidence, in opera performance suggests that, the disciplinary power is the rule of following in order to describe some classical poetry and the purpose was to emphasise the power of the king. However, the opera performance can be changed in order to relate it to a contemporary life and now a day propose.

The result of the trial was convincing that, opera in over-all have relation with power, particularly have relation with the hierarchy and this led to discrimination and class definition, and this makes the movement or development difficult or impossible to change the form of opera.

However, a human is the creator of the meaning of power by establishing a system of domination. For the inspiration of the society, the government implements the rule through the individual.

Conclusion

In consultation, the relation between power and knowledge by Foucault discourse is that power has a relation with knowledge through something that forces us to support and something that is supported by knowledge.

Take a deeper dive into Power Dynamics in Law Enforcement's Relationship with Elites and Minorities with our additional resources.