Foucault Panopticism
The Power of Observation
The power of sight and observation are two actions that are generally associated with one another. However, what we fail to acknowledge is that these two actions, although associated with the same sense, have different responsibilities to fulfill. Although seeing is a habitual act we perform the second we open our eyes to when we fall asleep, we are not always observing our surroundings. Observation differs from sight due to the fact that when we observe, we are vividly noticing aspects of something or someone in order to gain information whereas sight is simply the faculty, or driving force, of seeing. We are able to obtain more powerful knowledge if we go about our days observing rather than just living a life full of brief sights. Michel Foucault, a French philosopher explores several elements in the ways in which our humanity and social sciences work. In his work, Discipline and Punishment: The Birth of the Prison he uses Jeremy Bentham’s design for a panoptic prison in which prisoners are watched constantly to explore how observation can change an individual’s behavior. Similarly Foucault believed, observation works as a disciplinary tool that forces individuals to act a certain way under constant surveillance, creating permanent effects. Foucault was correct in the sense that surveillance works in the same manner continuously within our society however, although an individual’s behavior is altered by the observation of another person, he is wrong to believe that their actions remain static. An individual’s behavior can be altered in several different circumstances due to the type of audience and the fear of being misjudged.
Foucault explores the concept of a prison imagined by Jeremy Bentham called the Panopticon. The Panopticon was initially created to establish discipline and “to induce in the inmate and state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power. So to arrange things that the
The power of sight and observation are two actions that are generally associated with one another. However, what we fail to acknowledge is that these two actions, although associated with the same sense, have different responsibilities to fulfill. Although seeing is a habitual act we perform the second we open our eyes to when we fall asleep, we are not always observing our surroundings. Observation differs from sight due to the fact that when we observe, we are vividly noticing aspects of something or someone in order to gain information whereas sight is simply the faculty, or driving force, of seeing. We are able to obtain more powerful knowledge if we go about our days observing rather than just living a life full of brief sights. Michel Foucault, a French philosopher explores several elements in the ways in which our humanity and social sciences work. In his work, Discipline and Punishment: The Birth of the Prison he uses Jeremy Bentham’s design for a panoptic prison in which prisoners are watched constantly to explore how observation can change an individual’s behavior. Similarly Foucault believed, observation works as a disciplinary tool that forces individuals to act a certain way under constant surveillance, creating permanent effects. Foucault was correct in the sense that surveillance works in the same manner continuously within our society however, although an individual’s behavior is altered by the observation of another person, he is wrong to believe that their actions remain static. An individual’s behavior can be altered in several different circumstances due to the type of audience and the fear of being misjudged.
Foucault explores the concept of a prison imagined by Jeremy Bentham called the Panopticon. The Panopticon was initially created to establish discipline and “to induce in the inmate and state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power. So to arrange things that the
Cited: Foucault, Michel. “Panopticism.” Ways of Reading, 9th Edition. Eds. David Bartholomae and Anthony Petroski. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2011 282-309.