DOCSLIB.ORG

On Foucault and the Genealogy of Governmentality

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
On Foucault and the Genealogy of Governmentality ON FOUCAULT AND THE GENEALOGY OF GOVERNMENTALITY A Dissertation presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School at the University of Missouri-Columbia In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by ALAN NICHOLS Dr. Joseph Bien, Dissertation Supervisor DECEMBER 2007 © Copyright by Alan Nichols 2007 All Rights Reserved The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the [thesis or dissertation] entitled ON FOUCAULT AND THE GENEALOGY OF GOVERNMENTALITY presented by Alan Nichols, a candidate for the degree of doctor of philosophy, and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. Professor Joseph Bien Professor John Kultgen Professor Mary Jo Muratore Professor William Bondeson Professor Alexander von Schoenborn This Dissertation is respectfully dedicated to: My wonderful wife, Crystal, who has been beside me through it all. I love you. My children, Elaine and Joe, who have motivated me on many occasions when I was struggling. My mothers, Ora Casey and Wanda Anthony, who have both enriched my life in countless ways. The many friends and co-workers who have provided inspiration, assistance and encouragement over the years: Dr. Frank Hubbard, Dr. George Rainbolt, Dr. William Mugleston, Dr. Rob Page, Dr. Virginia Carson, Dr. Peter Markie, Dr. Bina Gupta, Dr. Paul Weirich, Dr. Simon Grist, Dr. Ralph Peters, Dr. John Reiners, Carla Patterson, Mauro Bisiacchi, Pam Crowe, Frank Minor, James McBain, Jeffrey Lebowski and others too numerous to mention. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my deepest gratitude to the following individuals who have provided invaluable assistance with this project: Dr. Joseph Bien, who has been of the greatest help to me since the beginning of my time at the University of Missouri. He has gone out of his way to assist me in the pursuit of this degree and I can honestly say that I would not be in the position I am now if it had not been for his guidance, insight and intellectual rigor. Dr. Dennis Sansom, who started me on this path nearly twenty years ago. Dr. Scott Arnold, who directed me back onto this path when I returned to college. Dr. Greg Pence, who has constantly encouraged me along the way. Dr. Steve Blankenship, for his wise commentary on my work and his interest in the subject of my dissertation which really motivated me to take it up again ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................. ii ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... iv TEXT INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1 Goals of the Study ON GOVERNMENTALITY ...................................................................................19 MACHIAVELLI AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE……...................93 HOBBES, LOCKE AND THE GOVERNMENT OF NATURE..........................166 CONCLUSION...............................................................................................................236 Accomplishments of the Study and Suggestions for Further Research BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................245 VITA ................................................................................................................................258 iii ON FOUCAULT AND THE GENEALOGY OF GOVERNMENTALITY ALAN NICHOLS Dr. Joseph Bien, Dissertation Supervisor ABSTRACT In this dissertation I perform what I take to be a genealogy of governmentality by tracing the history of governmentality through various political philosophers and culminating in the work of Michel Foucault. I begin with some examination of governmentality as it appears in the discursive space opened by Foucault's later work, in particular his History of Sexuality, Vol. 1. I then turn to an examination of Plato and Aristotle, looking at how some contemporary interlocutors have been governmental in their approach. I conclude the first chapter with a look at ideology and historical explanation. Next, I examine Machiavelli's The Prince, also in light of some current interlocutors, particularly Foucault and John Najemy. The purpose here is to see how Machiavelli may well have presaged some governmental space in his work and how others have utilized this space. I also address the dispute between Foucault and Derrida over Descartes as well as Foucault's insight into authorship and show how this all relates to Machiavelli and The Prince. The final chapter looks at Hobbes and Locke's approaches to governance, particularly as they apply to the governance of nature. I continue the strategy of looking at current interlocutors, paying close attention to some contemporary commentary on Locke. I also look at the nature of historical explanation, in particular the approach that involves utilizing the "covering-law" models of explanation. I close with some thoughts on how this sort of explanation fails from a Foucauldian perspective. iv Introduction In this dissertation I perform what I take to be a genealogy of governmentality. In essence, my goal is to turn Foucault‟s genealogical methodology inward on a central concept of his later thought. My initial purpose is to clarify what this term means and to reflect upon how this concept serves as a transitional device between his earlier work and his later work. Further, and perhaps most importantly, I will make use of this concept to show that Foucault‟s concerns are not as divorced from traditional issues in social and political philosophy as is commonly assumed. I will proceed in what I take, and what I intend, to be a Foucauldian style, neither as parody nor tribute, but as a reflection of the impact his work has had upon the development of my thought in the area of social and political philosophy. My intention, then, is to examine the origins of Foucault‟s notion of governmentality both within the context of his own work and also within the political discourses of Machiavelli, Hobbes and Locke. Governmentality is a significant part of Foucault's thought that has been both much commented upon and utilized in recent scholarship. At the same time, the correlation between governmentality and the aforementioned philosophers has not been the subject of much analysis. I believe that Foucault‟s shift to the use of governmentality as a mode of recognizing power is an important signifier of a change in focus in Foucault‟s thought from a concern with power relations between individuals themselves, or between individuals and institutions, to the relationship of 1 power that exists between the individual and his or herself as subject. The motivation for this shift can be better understood if some context is provided, especially a historical context for the notion of governmentality itself. It is not my contention that Foucault discovered the notion of governmentality hiding within the work of Machiavelli, Hobbes or Locke after a great deal of conceptual analysis. Rather, it is the reading of those philosophers, particularly Machiavelli and Hobbes, which occasioned Foucault‟s utilization of this concept and, at the same time, opened a discursive space wherein governmentality can be seen to have a reflexive character, insofar as some contemporary non-Foucauldian analyses of said philosophers were being advanced in such terms. Since it plays such an integral and transformational role in Foucault‟s later thought it is important to have some idea of what Foucault means by “governmentality”, which then entails an examination of the origins of the idea of “governmentality” in Foucault's work. At that point, an examination of some relevant portions of and discussions regarding Machiavelli, Hobbes and Locke will also be useful in clarifying how Foucault uses this concept. However, prior to undertaking the main portion of this zesty enterprise, I wish to clarify certain points regarding genealogy as a methodology as well as the idea of a Foucauldian style. Following this, a brief survey of the contents of this dissertation will be provided along with some rationale for addressing these topics in the manner found herein. The discussion of governmentality itself occupies a place within the first chapter and I will consequently address it very briefly in this introduction. Let us begin by stating a few biographical facts about Foucault. He likely would find this to be horrifyingly inappropriate, insofar as it was his position that situating the author 2 in relation to a work only served to obscure the work itself. Indeed, in an anonymous interview given late in his life he half-jokingly suggested that all scholarly texts be published anonymously for an entire year—though in the next breath he admitted that the only thing this would accomplish is to ensure that no scholars would publish their texts during that year. Paul Michel Foucault was born October 15, 1926 in Poitiers, France. His father was a surgeon and professor of anatomy at the local university. It was widely expected that Michel would follow in his father‟s footsteps and, for a time, it seemed as if he would do so—albeit in psychology rather than surgery. His early interests were in history and literature. He had some training in philosophy as well, studying Bergson, Spinoza, Plato and Aristotle while preparing to take the entrance exam for the Ecole Normale Supérieure. However, his first
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Art of 'Governing Nature': 'Green' Governmentality
    THE ART OF ‘GOVERNING NATURE’: ‘GREEN’ GOVERNMENTALITY AND THE MANAGEMENT OF NATURE by KRISTAN JAMES HART A thesis submitted to the Graduate Program in Environmental Studies In conformity with the requirements for the Degree of Masters of Environmental Studies Queen„s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada (September, 2011) Copyright ©Kristan James Hart, 2011 Abstract This thesis seeks to unpack the notions of Michael Foucault's late work on governmentality and what insights it might have for understanding the „governing of nature‟. In doing this it also operates as a critique of what is often termed 'resourcism', a way of evaluating nature which only accounts for its utility for human use and does not give any acceptance to the idea of protecting nature for its own sake, or any conception of a nature that cannot be managed. By utilizing a study of the govern-mentalities emerging throughout liberalism, welfare-liberalism and neoliberalism I argue that this form of 'knowing' nature-as-resource has always been internal to rationalities of liberal government, but that the bracketing out of other moral valuations to the logic of the market is a specific function of neoliberal rationalities of governing. I then seek to offer an analysis of the implications for this form of nature rationality, in that it is becoming increasingly globalized, and with that bringing more aspects of nature into metrics for government, bringing new justifications for intervening in „deficient‟ populations under the rubric of „sustainable development. I argue, that with this a new (global) environmental subject is being constructed; one that can rationally assess nature-as-resource in a cost-benefit logic of wise-use conservation.
    [Show full text]
  • 125 from the End of Man to the Art of Life: Rereading Foucault's
    © Kenneth Berger DOI: https://doi.org/10.22439/fs.v0i24.5529 ISSN: 1832-5203 Foucault Studies, No. 24, pp. 125-150, June 2018 From the End of Man to the Art of Life: Rereading Foucault’s Changing Aesthetics Kenneth Berger, Brown University ABSTRACT: In Foucault’s writing throughout the 1960s, in which he foregrounds the critical function of language and signification, works of art and literature – and works of avant-garde art and literature in particular – appear prominently and are the objects of sustained theoretical investment. In the 1970s, however, as Foucault moves away from his earlier concern with language’s capacity to dissolve “man” and begins to concentrate instead on the ways in which man is governed, works of art and literature no longer possess the same political promise for him and drop out almost completely from his writing. Yet the question of aesthetics does not disappear for him entirely, and, in his final years, he returns to it, though with his analysis now directed at what he calls an “art” or “aesthetics of life.” In this paper, I examine these developments with the aim of drawing out the connections between Foucault’s changing view of aesthetics and the larger transformations that take shape within his overall project. Against this background, I argue that Foucault’s call for an art of life, in which the individual develops techniques for continually reinventing his or her existence, does not necessitate abandoning the avant- garde aesthetic practices that he had previously advocated. Rather, I assert, his conception of an art of life – when read in conjunction with his theoriZation of critique as a “permanent” questioning of the limits imposed on us – offers a new framework for reimagining both the function of those practices and their legacies in culture today.
    [Show full text]
  • Foucault Studies © Lisa Weems, 2005 ISSN: 1832-5203 Foucault Studies, No 3, Pp
    foucault studies © Lisa Weems, 2005 ISSN: 1832-5203 Foucault Studies, No 3, pp. 144-149, Nov 2005 REVIEW Sara Mills, Michel Foucault (London: Routledge, 2003). ISBN: 0415245680 One difficult task for educators is the struggle to decide what should be included in the curriculum. All teachers, regardless of disciplinary field or level of education, grapple with the selection of topics and texts to organize discussions of a particular subject. What is not common to all teachers, perhaps, is the problem that arises when the “subject” (multiple meanings intended) specifically writes against the academic practices typically utilized in making curricular decisions. Foucault rejected many standard academic practices, such as canonization, biographical reading, and attempts to totalize an author’s theoretical contribution by reading her “oeuvre.” Given these constraints, how does one write a book intended to serve as an accessible introduction to a critical theorist whose scholarship and political affiliations were prolific and complex? This was the challenge Sara Mills faced as she wrote the text at hand. Overall, the author has successfully produced a straightforward and instructive examination of the work of Michel Foucault that is mindful of the potential theoretical pitfalls of such an endeavor. I highly recommend this book to anyone interested the work of Foucault, but especially to persons who have little prior exposure to the philosopher, and/or who want a brief survey of his ideas. It will make an excellent textbook for undergraduate or graduate courses that deal with issues of power, culture and social problems. The book will also be a good sourcebook for policy makers or professionals in the human services interested in linking critical theory, practice and activism.
    [Show full text]
  • Foucault and Deleuze, April 2014 Nicolae Morar, Penn State University, Thomas Nail, University of Denver, and Daniel W
    Nicolae Morar, Thomas Nail, and Daniel W. Smith 2014 ISSN: 1832‐5203 Foucault Studies, No. 17, pp. 4‐10, April 2014 INTRODUCTION Foucault Studies Special Issue: Foucault and Deleuze, April 2014 Nicolae Morar, Penn State University, Thomas Nail, University of Denver, and Daniel W. Smith, Purdue University Gilles Deleuze and Michel Foucault are widely accepted to be central figures of post‐war French philosophy. Philosophers, cultural theorists, and others have devoted considerable effort to the critical examination of the work of each of these thinkers, but despite the strong biographical and philosophical connection between Foucault and Deleuze, very little has been done to explore the relationship between them. This special issue of Foucault Studies is the first collection of essays to address this critical deficit with a rigorous comparative discussion of the work of these two philosophers. Deleuze’s Course Lectures on Foucault In particular, this special issue is motivated by the recent (2011) online publication of Gilles Deleuze’s course lectures on Michel Foucault (1985‐86) at the Bibliothèque Nationale de France (French National Library) in Paris. The BNF collected the available recordings of Deleuze’s seminar lectures at the University of Paris 8 and converted them into digital files. Needless to say, the task was a painstaking one, but the mp3 files have now been made accessible online through the Gallica search engine at the library.1 When Foucault died in 1984, Deleuze was so affected by the death of his friend, that he began lecturing and writing a book about Foucault’s philosophical corpus immediately. When asked why he wanted to write such a book, Deleuze was quite clear, “it marks an inner need of mine, my admiration for him, how I was moved by his death, and his unfinished work.”2 Deleuze’s desire for some kind of reconciliation with Foucault seems to have been a mutual one.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 from the Loving Struggle to the Struggle to Love
    1 ᳚ From the Loving Struggle to the Struggle to Love A Conversation with Calvin O. Schrag RAMSEY ERIC RAMSEY AND DAVID JAMES MILLER INTRODUCTORY REMARKS RER/DJM: Professor Schrag, we are immensely grateful for the opportu- nity to reflect here on the richness of the work that marks your distin- guished career. We hope that, in some small way, we can offer something here that acknowledges the time, encouragement, and support you so selflessly and graciously give those who are working in philosophy and communication. It is our intention to conduct this conversation in such a way that it will prove to be useful both to those who are familiar with your work and to those as yet unfamiliar with it. We hope to offer those already familiar with the work, not only further contextualization, but a new perspective on the work as well. We have always believed that the radical implications of your work, implications that have become obvious to us in our many conversations with you, have too often been overlooked, and we hope that in this conversation we can bring some of these implications to the fore. For those unfamiliar with your work, we hope to offer a consoli- dated, if not a comprehensive, introduction to your thought. In discussing your work, it will become evident that we have a par- ticular interest in your reflections on the phenomenon of “communicative praxis.” We are scholars trained in both the disciplines of philosophy and communication and have been dedicated from the first to an elaboration of the philosophy of communication.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Governmentality
    ARTICLE IN PRESS + MODEL Political Geography xx (2006) 1e5 www.elsevier.com/locate/polgeo Rethinking governmentality Stuart Elden* Department of Geography, Durham University, South Road, Durham, DH1 3LE, United Kingdom On 1st February 1978 at the Colle`ge de France, Michel Foucault gave the fourth lecture of his course Se´curite´, Territoire, Population [Security, Territory, Population]. This lecture, which became known simply as ‘‘Governmentality’’, was first published in Italian, and then in English in the journal Ideology and Consciousness in 1979. In 1991 it was reprinted in The Foucault Effect, a collection which brought together work by Foucault and those inspired by him (Burch- ell, Gordon, & Miller, 1991). Developing from this single lecture has been a veritable cottage industry of material, across the social sciences, including geography, of ‘governmentality studies’. In late 2004 the full lecture course and the linked course from the following year were pub- lished by Seuil/Gallimard as Se´curite´, Territoire, Population: Cours au Colle`ge de France (1977e1978) and Naissance de la biopolitique: Cours au Colle`ge de France (1978e1979) [The Birth of Biopolitics]. The lectures were edited by Michel Senellart, and the publication was timed to coincide with the 20th anniversary of Foucault’s death. They are currently being translated into English by Graham Burchell, and we publish an excerpt from the first lecture of the Security, Territory, Population course here. Given the interest of geographers in the notion of governmentality, the publication of the lectures is likely to have a significant impact. The concept of governmentality has produced a range of important studies, including those in a range of disciplines (see, for example, Barry, Osborne, & Rose, 1996; Dean, 1999; Lemke, 1997; Senellart, 1995; Walters & Haahr, 2004; Walters & Larner, 2004) as well as some analyses from within geography (Braun, 2000; Cor- bridge, Williams, Srivastava, & Veron, 2005; Hannah, 2000; Huxley, 2007; Legg, 2006).
    [Show full text]
  • Foucault's Darwinian Genealogy
    genealogy Article Foucault’s Darwinian Genealogy Marco Solinas Political Philosophy, University of Florence and Deutsches Institut Florenz, Via dei Pecori 1, 50123 Florence, Italy; [email protected] Academic Editor: Philip Kretsedemas Received: 10 March 2017; Accepted: 16 May 2017; Published: 23 May 2017 Abstract: This paper outlines Darwin’s theory of descent with modification in order to show that it is genealogical in a narrow sense, and that from this point of view, it can be understood as one of the basic models and sources—also indirectly via Nietzsche—of Foucault’s conception of genealogy. Therefore, this essay aims to overcome the impression of a strong opposition to Darwin that arises from Foucault’s critique of the “evolutionistic” research of “origin”—understood as Ursprung and not as Entstehung. By highlighting Darwin’s interpretation of the principles of extinction, divergence of character, and of the many complex contingencies and slight modifications in the becoming of species, this essay shows how his genealogical framework demonstrates an affinity, even if only partially, with Foucault’s genealogy. Keywords: Darwin; Foucault; genealogy; natural genealogies; teleology; evolution; extinction; origin; Entstehung; rudimentary organs “Our classifications will come to be, as far as they can be so made, genealogies; and will then truly give what may be called the plan of creation. The rules for classifying will no doubt become simpler when we have a definite object in view. We possess no pedigrees or armorial bearings; and we have to discover and trace the many diverging lines of descent in our natural genealogies, by characters of any kind which have long been inherited.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Critique Or Transcendental Critique in Foucault: Two Kantian Lineages Colin Koopman, University of Oregon
    Colin Koopman 2010 ISSN: 1832-5203 Foucault Studies, No. 8, pp. 100-121, February 2010 ARTICLE Historical Critique or Transcendental Critique in Foucault: Two Kantian Lineages Colin Koopman, University of Oregon ABSTRACT: A growing body of interpretive literature concerning the work of Michel Foucault asserts that Foucault’s critical project is best interpreted in light of various strands of philosophical phenomenology. In this article I dispute this interpretation on both textual and philosophical grounds. It is shown that a core theme of ‘the phenomenological Foucault’ having to do with transcendental inquiry cannot be sustained by a careful reading of Foucault’s texts nor by a careful interpretation of Foucault’s philosophical commitments. It is then shown that this debate in Foucault scholarship has wider ramifications for understanding ‘the critical Foucault’ and the relationship of Foucault’s projects to Kantian critical philosophy. It is argued that Foucault’s work is Kantian at its core insofar as it institutes a critical inquiry into conditions of possibility. But whereas critique for Kant was transcendental in orientation, in Foucault critique becomes historical, and is much the better for it. Keywords: Michel Foucault, Critique, Immanuel Kant, Phenomenology, Transcen- dental Critique. 100 Koopman: Historical Critique or Transcendental Crititique in Foucault ‚You seem to me Kantian or Husserlian. In all of my work I strive instead to avoid any reference to this transcendental as a condition of the possibility for any knowledge. When I say that I strive to avoid it, I don’t mean that I am sure of succeeding< I try to historicize to the utmost to leave as little space as possible to the transcendental.
    [Show full text]
  • Gilles Deleuze's American Rhizome by Michelle Renae Koerner the Graduate Program in Literature
    The Uses of Literature: Gilles Deleuze’s American Rhizome by Michelle Renae Koerner The Graduate Program in Literature Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Kenneth Surin, Co-Chair ___________________________ Priscilla Wald, Co-Chair ___________________________ Wahneema Lubiano ___________________________ Frederick Moten ___________________________ Michael Hardt Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Program in Literature in the Graduate School of Duke University 2010 i v iv ABSTRACT The Uses of Literature: Gilles Deleuze’s American Rhizome by Michelle Renae Koerner The Graduate Program in Literature Duke University Date:_______________________ Approved: ___________________________ Kenneth Surin, Co-Chair ___________________________ Priscilla Wald, Co-Chair ___________________________ Wahneema Lubiano ___________________________ Frederick Moten ___________________________ Michael Hardt An abstract of a dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Program in Literature in the Graduate School of Duke University 2010 Copyright by Michelle Renae Koerner 2010 Abstract “The Uses of Literature: Gilles Deleuze’s American Rhizome” puts four writers – Walt Whitman, Herman Melville, George Jackson and William S. Burroughs – in conjunction with four concepts – becoming-democratic, belief in the world, the line of flight, and finally, control societies. The aim of this
    [Show full text]
  • Ethical Invention in Sartre and Foucault: Courage, Freedom, Transformation
    © Dr. Kimberly S. Engels ISSN: 1832-5203 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22439/fs.v27i27.5893 Foucault Studies, No. 27, 96-116, December 2019 ARTICLE Ethical Invention in Sartre and Foucault: Courage, Freedom, Transformation DR. KIMBERLY S. ENGELS Molloy College, USA ABSTRACT. This article explores the concept of ethical invention in both Jean-Paul Sartre’s and Michel Foucault’s later lectures and interviews, showing that a courageous disposition to invent or transform plays a key role in both thinkers’ visions of ethics. Three of Sartre’s post-Critique of Dialectical Reason lectures on ethics are examined: Morality and History, The Rome Lecture, and A Plea for Intellectuals. It is shown that ethical invention for Sartre requires the use of our freedom to transcend our current circumstances, a willingness to break away from harmful ideologies, and directing our free praxis towards the goal of universal humanism. Examining several of Foucault’s interviews alongside his lecture series The Government of Self and Others and The Courage of Truth, it is shown that ethical invention for Foucault requires a rejection of necessities or inevitabilities in our current landscape, a willingness to reshape our current beliefs, and a philosophical way of life that results in an alteration of the relationship to self and others. For both thinkers, ethical inven- tion should be preceded by a critical reflection on ourselves in our historical moment. Both argue that ethical invention requires a rejection of the inherent value of our world and realization that the conditions of possibility for being subjects are malleable. Last, it is shown that both philoso- phers specifically call philosophers or intellectuals to invent.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Uses of Genealogy: Michel Foucault and Bernard Williams 90 1
    the practices which we might use genealogy to inquire into. Of course, 1 these two thinkers each used genealogy in very different senses insofar as I Chapter 5 Nietzsche's genealogy was an attempt to undermine and subvert certain! modern moral practices whereas Williams' was an attempt to vindicate i Two uses of genealogy: Michel Foucault and and strengthen certain modern moral notions concerning the value ofl Bernard Williams practices of truthfulness. Although the minimal conclusion that Foucault's genealogy differs I Colin Koopman from Nietzsche's and Williams' genealogy may not be all that surprising" what is nonetheless revealing is an exploration of the specific terms oni which these varying conceptions of genealogy can be differentiated. Such! an exploration particularly helps us recognize the complex relationship I The notion CMn1lWn to all the work that I have done . .. is that of problematization. between genealogy and critique. It is my claim that Foucault's project dif-i -Michel Foucault, 1984, 'The Concern/or Truth' fers from more normatively ambitious uses of genealogy and that muchI i light is shed on the way in which Foucault used genealogy as a critical appa­ ratus by explicating this difference. Foucault used genealogy to develop a i Michel Foucault's final description of his genealogical and archaeological form of critique that did not rely on the traditional normative ambitions inquiries in terms of the concept of 'problematization' is, most commen­ which have motivated so much of modern philosophy. Foucault, perhaps
    [Show full text]
  • Psychiatry and Anti-Psychiatry: History, Rhetoric and Reality
    2 (4) 2018 DOI: 10.26319/4717 Daniel Burston, Psychology Department, Duquesne University, Pittsburgh PA [email protected] Psychiatry and Anti-psychiatry: History, Rhetoric and Reality Abstract: The term “anti-psychiatry” was coined in 1912 by Dr. Bernhard Beyer, but only popularized by Dr. David Cooper (and his critics) in the midst of a widespread cultural revolt against involuntary hospitalization and in-patient psychiatry during the 1960s and 1970s. However, with the demise of the old-fashioned mental hospital, and the rise of Big Pharma (with all its attendant evils), the term “anti-psychiatry” has outlived its usefulness. It survives merely as a term of abuse or a badge of honor, depending on the user and what rhetorical work this label is expected to perform. Those who use the term nowadays generally have a polemical axe to grind, and seldom understand the term’s origins or implications. It is time that serious scholars retire this term, or to restrict its use to R.D.Laing’s followers in the Philadelphia Associates and kindred groups that sprang up in the late 1960s and 1970s. Keywords: psychiatry, anti-psychiatry, psychoanalysis, DSM V, Big Pharma, normalization, psychopolitics On November 16, 2016, Dr. Bonnie Burstow, Associate Professor of Adult Education and Community Development at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, which is affiliated with the University of Toronto, launched the first (and thus far, only) scholarship in North America to support doctoral theses on the subject of “anti-psychiatry.” Predictably, this bold gesture garnered praise in some quarters, but provoked a barrage of criticism from both in and outside the university.
    [Show full text]