Society

pp 1–6 | Cite as

Knowledge/Power/Resistance

Profile
  • 4 Downloads

Abstract

Francis Bacon’s famous metaphor that knowledge is power has been the intellectual springboard for many scholars to offer misleading observations about the inordinate authority and power of knowledge. Among the important implications that Bacon derives from his metaphor is the assertion that individuals provided with experimental skills and practical knowledge are those most entitled to hold executive office, rather than the aristocracy of blood. In this essay, we critically analyze Michel Foucault’s ambivalent version of the closeness of knowledge, power and authority.

Keywords

Knowledge Power Domination Resistance Foucault Sociology of knowledge 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Amanda Machin and Sebastian Rauter-Nestler for their critical feedback and editorial advice.

Further Reading

  1. Adolf, M., & Stehr N. 2015. The return of social physics? Paper presented at the conference ICT@admin - the Technology of Information, communication and administration - an entwined history. Swiss Federal Archives, Bern, Switzerland (Friday, March 27, 2015).Google Scholar
  2. Adolf, M. & Stehr, N. 2017. Knowledge: Is Knowledge Power? London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Dean, M. 2001. Michel Foucault: A man in danger. In G. Ritzer, & B. Smart (Eds.), Handbook of social theory (pp. 324–338). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Duncan, J. S. 2007. In The shadows of the tropics. Climate, race and biopower in nineteenth century. Aldershot:Ashgate.Google Scholar
  5. Edwards, P. N., Gitelman, L., Hecht, G., Jones, A., Larkin, B., & Safier, N. 2011. AHR conversation: Historical perspectives on the circulation of information. American Historical Review, 116, 1393–1435.Google Scholar
  6. Foucault, M. [1969] 1972. The Archaeology of Knowledge. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Foucault, M. [1975] 1977. Discipline and Punish: The birth of the prison. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  8. Foucault, M. 1977. Prison talk: An interview. Radical Philosophy, 16, 10–15.Google Scholar
  9. Foucault, M. 1980. Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972–1977. Edited by Colin Gordon. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  10. Foucault, M. 1982. The subject and power. In H. L. Dreyfus, & P. Rabinow (Eds.), Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics (pp. 208–226). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Foucault, M. [1984a] 1987. “The ethic of care for the self as a practice of freedom,” an interview with Michel Foucault by Raúl Fornet-Betancourt, Helmut Becker, Alfredo Gomez-Müller and J.D. Gauthier (January 20, 1984). Philosophy & Social Criticism, 12, 112–131.Google Scholar
  12. Foucault, M. 1984b. What is enlightenment? In P. Rabinow (Ed.), The Foucault Reader. New York: Pantheon Books, 1984, pp. 32–50.Google Scholar
  13. Foucault, M. 1984c. Polemics, Politics, and Problemizations. An Interview with Michel Foucault. In P. Rabinow (Ed.). 1984. The Foucault Reader. New York: Pantheon, pp. 381–390.Google Scholar
  14. Foucault, M. 1984d. On the Genealogy of Ethics: An Overview of Work in Progress. In P. Rabinow (Ed.). The Foucault Reader. New York: Pantheon, pp. 340–372.Google Scholar
  15. Foucault, M. 2007. Ästhetik der Existenz. Schriften zur Lebenskunst. Frankfurt am Main:Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  16. Kritzman, L. D. 1988 (Ed.). Michel Foucault: Politics, philosophy, culture: Interviews and other writings 1977–1984. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Kusch, M. 1991. Foucault's Strata and Fields: An investigation into archaeological and genealogical science studies. Dordrecht:Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lemert, C. C., & Gillan, G. 1982. Michel Foucault: Social theory as transgression. New York:Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Liebknecht, W. [1872] 1891. Wissen ist Macht - Macht ist Wissen; Festrede gehalten zum Stiftungsfest des Dresdener Bildungsvereins am 5. Februar 1872. Neue Auflage. Berlin: Verlag der Expedition des Vorwärts.Google Scholar
  20. Luhmann, N. 1990. Die Wissenschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main:Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  21. Megill, A. 1985. Prophets of Extremity: Nietzsche, Heidegger, Foucault, Derrida. Berkeley:University of California Press.Google Scholar
  22. Michels, R. [1911] 1949. Political Parties. A sociological study of the oligarchical tendencies of modern democracy. Glencoe: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  23. Neurath, O. 1931. Physicalism. The Monist, 41, 618–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Paras, E. 2006. Foucault 2.0: Beyond power and knowledge. New York:The Other Press.Google Scholar
  25. Rose, N., & Miller, P. 1992. Political power beyond the state: Problematics of government. British Journal of Sociology, 43, 173–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Stehr, N. 2016. Information, Power, and Democracy. Liberty is a daughter of knowledge. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Touraine, A. [1992] 1995. Critique of Modernity. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political & Social SciencesZeppelin UniversityFriedrichshafenGermany
  2. 2.Department of Communication & CultureZeppelin UniversityFriedrichshafenGermany

Personalised recommendations