Foucault's Modes Of Objectification Analysis

Giddens definition of power is “transformative capacity”, which refers to the ability in making a difference in the world. An individual makes a difference when he or she carries out a social action with intention. He states that everyone has power since we all carry out social actions, but the amount of power that a person has is interconnected with “resources”. He believes there are two types of resources: allocative and authoritative. Allocative recourses are physical things that you can control, like a factory. Authoritative resources is when you control the people’s activities, for example having a high position in civil service.
He views social systems as “power systems”, and is most likely part of the “institutional mediation of power”. …show more content…
The first mode is “dividing practises”. This is the exclusion of individuals, whether it is the division of the subject with others or dividing the subject, for example the bad and good, the healthy and sick, and the poor and the rich. The second mode is “scientific classification”. The aim of this mode is to understand the nature of human beings through examination. This allowed us to define “normal” in the hope of treating the “abnormal”. The final form is “subjectification”. This is the process of self-understanding, self-formation and how conformity is achieved. People see themselves as “normal” in relation to health, race and sex- Foucault calls this “power of the …show more content…
The system interrogation is concerned or focusses on the steering performance of the social system. The social interrogation is interested in how individuals relate or interact with each other within the system of institution. If the two integrations break, the social system may collapse and it will lose its legitimacy. The individuals within the social system will not be able to interact with one another in a civil fashion. Examples of a crisis within the social system is investment strikes, high inflation, and individuals dropping out of the labour force. Hubermas suggests that one can avoid crisis by using “steering imperatives”. With an economic crisis, the method will most likely be through increasing the state activity within the economy. The will most likely increase the loyalty within the social system. If the state fails to manage the crisis, withdrawal of legitimacy would most likely