In the late Spring and Fall of 1967, America got to be mindful of a developing development of youngsters, based mostly out of California, called the "hallucinogenic development." This development depended on medication use, odd music, and sight and sound encounters to rise above reality and convey a higher condition of cognizance to the individuals who took an interest. The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test is the chronicle of how this development started: with one individual, Ken Kesey, and his band of supporters, the Merry Pranksters. However, how do these pranksters relate to law and punishment as thought out by Foucault 's main observations; the disappearance of the public visibility of punishment and the disappearance of the body as the object
…show more content…
There is no authority that one cannot handle. For example, Kesey who is a youthful, skilled author who has recently seen his first book. Is one who starts a band of followers since he joins to take an interest in a medication study supported by the CIA, while attending Standford 's experimental writing program. The medication they give him is another exploratory medication called LSD. With this drug, him along with his followers are fascinated by the drive the drug gives them, and because the drug is not illegal the police cannot do much even if they want to. This makes us question, then what is the difference between illegal and legal? Or where have we come to so this could occur. What is then to punish if there is no such act of punishment. If we bring Foucault 's points into this we can acknowledge the lack of displacement of punishment he emphasizes on. The division between the allowed and the prohibited has safeguarded a specific consistency starting with one century then onto the next. Then again, 'wrongdoing ', the item with which correctional practice is safeguarded a concerned, has significantly modified. As such, while the formal contrast between the illicit and lawful continue as before, the exceptionally substance and nature of wrongdoing or unlawful acts significantly change. This figuration of wrongdoing, for Foucault, is the additionally intriguing part of the vanishing of torment and open
There is no authority that one cannot handle. For example, Kesey who is a youthful, skilled author who has recently seen his first book. Is one who starts a band of followers since he joins to take an interest in a medication study supported by the CIA, while attending Standford 's experimental writing program. The medication they give him is another exploratory medication called LSD. With this drug, him along with his followers are fascinated by the drive the drug gives them, and because the drug is not illegal the police cannot do much even if they want to. This makes us question, then what is the difference between illegal and legal? Or where have we come to so this could occur. What is then to punish if there is no such act of punishment. If we bring Foucault 's points into this we can acknowledge the lack of displacement of punishment he emphasizes on. The division between the allowed and the prohibited has safeguarded a specific consistency starting with one century then onto the next. Then again, 'wrongdoing ', the item with which correctional practice is safeguarded a concerned, has significantly modified. As such, while the formal contrast between the illicit and lawful continue as before, the exceptionally substance and nature of wrongdoing or unlawful acts significantly change. This figuration of wrongdoing, for Foucault, is the additionally intriguing part of the vanishing of torment and open