What is Power? | Michel Foucault

ralph waldo emerson once wrote that to be great is to be misunderstood this is a code that fits foucault perfectly the french philosopher is one of the most famous and infamous thinkers of the 20th century he is idolized and demonized as one of the great figureheads of postmodernism and his polarized reputation is mirrored by the reception of the topic at the center of his work power foucault accomplishes one of those rare moments in the history of philosophy when the concept that has stood before our eyes for centuries is suddenly turned on its head his innovative

analysis of power transforms our understanding of the concept from a hierarchical domination into an oceanic force of nature in this episode we're going to explore foucault's theory of power why it is so revolutionary and how it can be applied to understand our everyday world and our own lives in coming to terms with foucault's theory of power the first thing we have to distinguish between is the theoretical and the empirical levels of power the empirical level is the study of forms that power has crystallized into over the course of history it is these empirical trends the

foucault studies in his books on the prison system mental asylums science and sexuality a step removed from these historical crystallizations of power there is the theoretical level of power which is the fundamental nature of power that is true across all of its manifestations this is the study of power itself and it's this level we're going to be exploring in this episode in exploring this theoretical level of power it'll be helpful to first talk about what power isn't this in itself is an important part of foucault's work and will serve as a helpful backdrop against which

his own theory will be seen much clearer according to foucault there is a tendency deeply rooted in the west commonly found in many political analyses of power and of sexuality to understand the concept in a certain way this misconception sees power as a top-down phenomenon and something that fans of conspiracy theories hobbes as leviathan orwell's 1984 and gramsci's hegemony will be quite familiar with in this view power is seen as something that is wielded by the powerful over the not so powerful central to this conception is the idea that power always operates negatively that is

to say power tells us what is allowed and what is forbidden and it punishes us if we transgress these rules but the trouble with this misconception for foucault is that it functions like misdirection causing us to overlook the majority of power's workings because we are fixated on a single narrow understanding of it this perspective evolved out of a legalistic way of viewing power and it is a long history in the west which foucault in some of his college de france lectures traced as far back as east gillis's plays about oedipus it is one way of

understanding power but it is only a fraction of it and it is in fact a misrepresentation of the whole power is not the power of the state dominating over its subjects nor is it the domination of one class over another as it is in marxist thinking these conceptions of power all miss the wood for the trees they are partial views that obscure the fundamental nature of power so what is power then if it's not the potency of sovereigns or the machinations of the state or class struggle or the dynamics of repression then what is power

in this 1976 work le valente de savoie or the will to knowledge there is a series of about a dozen pages where foucault packs in a condensed exploration of his theory of power you have to remember the vast majority of foucault's writings were investigations into the historical crystallizations of power in institutions like the asylum and the prison system he is very careful even in his lectures in speaking about power in itself the first thing to understand is that for foucault power is imminent that is to say it isn't something concrete or tangible but it is

nevertheless like gravity or magnetism a real and measurable force in the world we might not be able to observe gravity directly but its effects are everywhere and by taking a step back from these empirical effects we can form a theoretical understanding of gravity the same goes for power it's an imminent force of nature that operates independently of individuals foucault explicitly draws on this analogy with the hard sciences in his theory of power referring regularly to the microphysics of power but of course it should be noted that where gravity is equality of the physical world power

is a component of the social world unlike nietzsche fuco doesn't make a metaphysical conception out of power this leads us on to another important tenet of through cause power is intentional and non-subjective on the face of it this seems like a paradoxical assertion but it's quite sensible and it dovetails nicely with what we've been exploring recently on the channel by intentional foucault means that we make choices as free agents we have intention in the decisions that we make but these choices are steered by non-subjective forces if you've ever been at a party where someone asks

you to put on a song then you will recognize this distinction yes you have free choice sure you are technically free to put on killing me softly by the fujis that is within your power this is what fucon means by saying that power is intentional power is also non-subjective you can't control what's cool and what's not this is the non-subjective ocean of power that shapes and guides your decision in certain directions those of you who have seen the previous video on the four quadrants model will easily recognize this as the distinction between the first quadrant

and the third quadrant there's the intentional domain of the internal individual q1 and there's the non-subjective domain of the internal collective q3 this brings us on to another core component of foucault's theory and that is resistance in the will to knowledge he writes that where there is power there is resistance and yet or rather consequently this resistance is never in a position of exteriority in relation to power the final point is an important one rather than seeing resistance as external to power foucault sees it as internal in the classical model the revolutionaries and rebels might

be seen as resisting the power structure from the outside there is the power and there is us not so in fukuo's theory resistance is a fundamental part of the power dynamic if there's no resistance there's no power tied up with this we find freedom he writes that there cannot be relations of power unless the subjects are free if there are relations of power throughout every social field it is because there is freedom everywhere to return to our example while the power of context and common sense are trying to force your choice in a certain direction

you can resist if you want to you are free to put on killing me softly who knows you might just be able to pull it off as ironic and it'll even be cool power is funny that way all of which brings us on to the core piece of foucault's theory of power and that is force relations force relations are the atoms of fuco's bottom-up power system in the will to knowledge foucault gives a definition of power that begins as follows it seems to me that power must be understood in the first instance as the multiplicity

of force relations imminent in the sphere in which they operate we've already covered what we mean by imminent here but now let's talk about the multiplicity of force relations let's say you're getting ready to go to school one morning as you think about what you're going to wear for the day you can feel the tug of various force relations trying to yank you in different directions first start there are the force relations visible to the classical understanding of power the considerations of domination from above you have to worry about the school's dress code and whatever

laws your country might have so if you're in france you can't wear in the cab if you're in saudi arabia you can't not wear in the cab and so on but in foucault's theory this is just the beginning there's also the opinions of your parents there's the opinion of whatever clique you're in at school like goths jocks or nerds then there's your other schoolmates and beyond that there's a general consideration of what's in fashion and what's cool these are the multiplicity of force relations the foucault is referring to and they don't pull on you individually

they all operate all at once just like different minerals dissolve and diffuse through a body of water these forced relations are simultaneously active in the same place you these force relations are the centerpiece of foucault's theory of power they are the different elements coaxing and coercing you in different directions these force relations don't remain static and contained in one individual however and this is where things get really interesting these local force relations the feeling of your friends peers and parents opinions all pulling at you don't exist in isolation from each other they don't just act

on you pulling you this way or that they act on each other having established the multiplicity of force relations foucault goes on to talk about the process which through ceaseless struggles and confrontations transforms strengthens or reverses them as a support which these forced relations find in one another thus forming a chain or a system or on the contrary the disjunctions and contradictions which isolate them from one another so these forced relations struggle with each other on a side note you'll notice in all of this the central importance of war to foucault's framing of power in

his 1975 work discipline and punish foucault writes that one should take his powers model a perpetual battle rather than a contract regulating a transaction or the conquest of a territory this takes us back to heraclitus and nietzsche an essential place that struggle and adversity takes in their metaphysics so anyway these individual force relations don't just act on you they act on each other on the one hand we have them struggling and confronting each other this confrontation can lead these forced relations to transform and strengthen or to reverse but and this is where it gets really

interesting force relations don't just struggle with each other they can also support one another and bond together to form chains or systems let's think about this in terms of the getting dressed for school example if we look at the different force relations at play we can see how some combat and isolate and some support and combine you might see the opinions of your parents the school's dress code and your country's laws supporting each other and pushing you in one direction on the other hand you might have the opinions of your peers and what's in fashion

working together this combination of forced relations might be struggling against the more conservative force relations of the other group and both groups of forced relations might be strongly antagonistic to some innate desire in you that wants to dress like bozo the clown so already at the local level of your morning clothing choice we can see the wrestling of many collections of force relations but this doesn't stop at the individual level the final part of foucault's definition of power moves from talking about these chains and systems of force relations to the strategies in which they take

effect whose general design or institutional crystallization is embodied in the state apparatus in the formulation of the law in the various social hegemonies so now we are moving from the realm of microphysics into the macro realm of culture local forced relations the opinions of your friends your classmates your parents are what foucault again use in the language of warfare calls tactics tactics are local they are micro but at the macro level we have strategies as we've seen force relations can work together the forced relations of your parents opinions can join with those of the school

and the state in fact since hugo's theory of power is bottom up it is local micro opinions like your parents that ultimately creates the forced relations of the school and the state their opinions join with those of other parents and like-minded parties and these tribute trees of forced relations become rivers and gather more and more steam as they head to the great ocean of globalized influence greta thurmberg is a perfect example of this her tactical use of forced relations organizing a walk out from school converged with a greater trend in the substrate of power her

local tactical force relations got swept up in a much bigger strategical chain of force relations that had money and influence and brought her to the world stage on a side note it's also the perfect example of the intentional but non-subjective neither she nor anyone else for that matter could have predicted that her local tactical action could have had such major resonance in the non-subjective ocean of power which goes to show the dynamic living thing that power is the strategical level is a greater collection of shared force relations as these strategical alliances grow larger and denser

in time we see what foucault terms institutional crystallization these chains and systems of forced relations crystallize into institutions this could be a series of laws like the civil rights act the paris climate agreement or it could be a whole new form of government like happened in the wake of the american revolution the french revolution and the bolshevik revolution what started as a discontent of a few as a small resistance against an entrenched power in time formed a chain of allied force relations and ultimately led to the toppling of governments or massive innovations of law and

the way we organize society it would also be interesting to explore the connections between this conception of power in foucault and the jungian analysis of gods and mythology in future episodes i'd love to follow up this trail and explore a map over between foucault and young i think that foucault's microphysics of power would mix very curiously with the idea of gods as archetypal forces in the collective unconscious could the ancient gods be seen as chains of force relations and what would ritual and sacrifice look like through that lens it's a fascinating stream of thoughts to

consider but for now though that's everything for this episode of the living philosophy i'd like to thank shane croissant eater robert and all the other patrons for their incredible support of the channel if you'd like to get access to weekly bonus episode monthly q and a's and to get your name in the credits like these fine people then you can head over to patreon as ever if you have any thoughts insights or feedback i'd love to hear from you down in the comments otherwise i shall see you next time thank you for watching