Foucault News

News and resources on French thinker Michel Foucault (1926-1984)

CONFERENCE DE DISSENSUS SUR LA RECIDIVE

EXERCICES CRITIQUES SUR UNE PRODUCTION DE VERITE

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO CENTER IN PARIS
6, rue Thomas Mann
75013 PARIS

14 février 2013
9h30 – 19h00

pdf flyer

« Il ne faut en aucun cas écouter ceux qui vous disent :« Ne critiquez pas, vous qui n’êtes pas capable de faire une réforme ».Ce sont là des propos de cabinets ministériels »
Michel Foucault, 1980

Alors que les 14 et 15 février prochain siègera le jury de consensus, émanation d’une « conférence de consensus sur la prévention de la récidive », organisée par le Ministère de la  Justice,  nous  avons  choisi  de  nous réunir  pour  une  « conférence  de  dissensus » consistant en des exercices critiques portant sur une politique pénale et législative au moment même où elle se construit.

Il s’agit moins de manifester une opposition qu’une liberté. Nous ne prétendons pas être experts en « récidive ». Nous n’entendons pas délivrer une méthode ou un modèle, voire plusieurs, tendant à évaluer les « risques de récidive » et à prévenir la « récidive ».

Nous entendons plutôt questionner l’appel à des expertises sur un objet évanescent qui fut de tout temps un simple mais insaisissable instrument de gouvernement.  Nous entendons  questionner  ce  qu’il  en  est  de  cette forme  de  production  d’expertises  en « récidive » et de ses effets, ce qu’elle implique de pré-requis en termes de construction sociale de la délinquance et d’usages sociaux de la notion de « récidive » et dans quel type de rationalité politique elle s’inscrit.

Nous voudrions en dégager, d’une part les effets de véridiction (ce qu’il en résulte pour les jeux du vrai et du faux dans le champ du savoir) ; d’autre part les effets de juridiction (ce qu’il en résulte sur les institutions, les pratiques des professionnels). Nous mettrons aussi à l’épreuve les effets induits par toute prévention de la « récidive » fondée sur l’évaluation, en particulier actuarielle, à la fois sur la conception même du sujet éthique et sur les processus de décision ordonnés à la prédiction.

Bernard E. HARCOURT,
Julius Kreeger Professor of Law and Professor and Chairman of the Political Science Department, The University of Chicago
Pierrette PONCELA,
Professeure de Droit Pénal à l’Université Paris Ouest Nanterre

PROGRAMME

 Matin, sous la présidence de Bernard E. HARCOURT,
Professeur à l’Université de Chicago

9h 30            Ouverture et introduction à la journée
Bernard HARCOURT et Pierrette PONCELA

10h               Analyse d’une méthode : gouvernementalité, jeux de vérité et récidive
Pierrette PONCELA, Professeure de Droit Pénal à l’Université Paris Ouest Nanterre

10h 30          Les paradoxes du risque, de la justice et de la dangerosité
François EWALD

Discussions, pause café

11h 30          Logical and Structural Fallacies: Gender, Race, and the Impact of Actuarial Methods
Kelly HANNAH-MOFFAT, Vice Dean and Professor of Sociology, University of Toronto

12h               Transformations: How To Make Positive Change in the Lives of Youths

Azim RAMELIZE, Assistant Commissioner, Chicago Department of Children and Youth Services

Discussions

13h               Lunch / Déjeuner libre

Après-midi, sous la présidence de Florence BELLIVIER,
Professeure à l’Université Paris Ouest Nanterre

14h 15          La fabrique du risque : une nouvelle imposture ?
Roland GORI, Psychanalyste, Membre d’Espace Analytique, Professeur émérite de psychopathologie à l’Université de Marseille, Initiateur de l’Appel des appels

15h               De la réinsertion à la prévention de la récidive : glissements et dérapages de la criminologie appliquée aux agents de probation
Xavier de LARMINAT, Post-doctorant, CESDIP

15h 30          Les élites économiques peuvent-elles être coupables ? La preuve par la récidive, une démonstration de E. Sutherland
Pierre  LASCOUMES, Directeur  de  recherches  au  CNRS,  Centre  d’études européennes, Sciences Po

Discussions et pause

16h 30          « On est partis de rien et on a fait un livre »
Joseph PONTHUS, éducateur spécialisé, et les auteurs de Nous…la Cité (La Découverte, 2012)

17h               Sur les illégalismes et la critique interne de l’actuariel
Bernard E. HARCOURT, Julius Kreeger Professor of Law and Professor and Chairman of the Political Science Department, The University of Chicago

17h 30          Discussions

18h               Réception au Centre à Paris de l’Université de Chicago

Text on youtube
Georges Charbonnier reçoit Michel Foucault au micro des Matinées de France Culture, en la présence de Jean Duvignaud – Professeur au collège de France et de Jean Claude Pecker – directeur de l’observatoire de Nice, pour discuter de la signification que donne l’auteur de l’Archéologie du savoir au mot archéologie, des règles de la fabrication et de la formation du discours, et de la pratique du discours avec pour exemple le cas de la folie et celui de la médecine. Foucault parle aussi, entre autres, de son “positivisme” et de ses liens avec le mouvement structuraliste.

Source: La nuit rêvée de … / émission de France Culture, produite par Philippe Garbit.

CITE“Considerations on Marxism, Phenomenology and Power. Interview with Michel Foucault”; Recorded on April 3rd, 1978
Michel Foucault, Colin Gordon, and Paul Patton
Presentation Alain Beaulieu,

English version in: Foucault Studies, No. 14, Sept. 2012, p. 98-114

En français
Michel Foucault, Colin Gordon, and Paul Patton, «Considérations sur le marxisme, la phénoménologie et le pouvoir», Cités, No. 52, Déc. 2012, p. 103-126

You may be interested in checking out some of the Foucault related posts on
New APPS: Art, Politics, Philosophy, Science. A group blog with people from all over the map.

Barry Stocker has recently been publishing a number of interesting posts on Foucault’s recently published lectures. There are also some interesting posts on a project on Foucault and liberty

Jeremy W. Crampton, Stuart Elden (Eds.), Space, Knowledge and Power: Foucault and Geography, London: Ashgate (now Routledge – 2025), November 2012 (E.book, Illustrated edition)
Previous Ed: paperback February 2007; hardback February 2007. I have also uploaded the more attractive original book cover for this post

Michel Foucault’s work is rich with implications and insights concerning spatiality, and has inspired many geographers and social scientists to develop these ideas in their own research. This book, the first to engage Foucault’s geographies in detail from a wide range of perspectives, is framed around his discussions with the French geography journal Hérodote in the mid 1970s. The opening third of the book comprises some of Foucault’s previously untranslated work on questions of space, a range of responses from French and English language commentators, and a newly translated essay by Claude Raffestin, a leading Swiss geographer.The rest of the book presents specially commissioned essays which examine the remarkable reception of Foucault’s work in English and French language geography; situate Foucault’s project historically; and provide a series of developments of his work in the contemporary contexts of power, biopolitics, governmentality and war. Contributors include a number of key figures in social/spatial theory such as David Harvey, Chris Philo, Sara Mills, Nigel Thrift, John Agnew, Thomas Flynn and Matthew Hannah. Written in an open and engaging tone, the contributors discuss just what they find valuable – and frustrating – about Foucault’s geographies. This is a book which will both surprise and challenge.

Contents:
Introduction: Space, knowledge and power: Foucault and geography, Stuart Elden and Jeremy W. Crampton.

Part 1 Questions:
Some questions from Michel Foucault to Hérodote, Michel Foucault (translated by Stuart Elden).

Part 2 Francophone Responses – 1977:
Hérodote editorial, translated by Gerald Moore;
Response: Jean-Michel Brabant (translated by Gerald Moore);
Response: Alain Joxe (translated by Gerald Moore);
Response:Jean-Bernard Racine and Claude Raffestin (translated by Gerald Moore);
Response: Michel Riou (translated by Gerald Moore).

Part 3 Anglophone Responses – 2006:
The Kantian roots of Foucault’s dilemmas, David Harvey;
Geography, gender and power, Sara Mills;
Overcome by space: reworking Foucault, Nigel Thrift;
Foucault among the geographers, Thomas Flynn.

Part 4 Contexts:
Strategy, medicine and habitat: Foucault in 1976, Stuart Elden;
Formations of ‘Foucault’ in Anglo-American geography: an archaeological sketch, Matthew Hannah;
Catalysts and converts: sparking interest for Foucault among Francophone geographers, Juliet J. Fall;
Could Foucault have revolutionized geography?, Claude Raffestin (translated by Gerald Moore).

Part 5 Texts:
The incorporation of the hospital into modern technology, Michel Foucault (translated by Edgar Knowlton Jr., William J. King, and Stuart Elden);
The meshes of power, Michel Foucault (translated by Gerald Moore);
The language of space, Michel Foucault (translated by Gerald Moore);
The force of flight, Michel Foucault (translated by Gerald Moore);
Questions on geography, Michel Foucault (translated by Colin Gordon).

Part 6 Development:
Geographies of governmentality, Margo Huxley;
The history of medical geography after Foucault, Gerry Kearns;
Maps, race and Foucault: eugenics and territorialization following World War I, Jeremy W. Crampton;
Beyond the Panopticon? Foucault and surveillance studies, David Murakami Wood;
Beyond the European province: Foucault and postcolonialism, Stephen Legg; Foucault, sexuality, geography, Philip Howell;
The problem with Empire, Mathew Coleman and John A. Agnew;
‘Bellicose history’ and ‘local discursivities’: an archaeological reading of Michel Foucault’s Society Must be Defended, Chris Philo.

About the Editors:
Dr Jeremy W. Crampton is from the Department of Geosciences at Georgia State University, USA. Dr Stuart Elden is from the Department of Geography at Durham University, UK.

Reviews: ‘Space, Knowledge and Power: Foucault and Geography elaborates Foucault’s thinking about geography and space in fascinating ways. Foucault scholars will be delighted and perhaps amazed to see this side of Foucault, and the book will immediately become an essential text for all geographers and everyone interested in Foucault’s understanding of space and its broader influence in the social sciences and social and cultural theory.’
John Pickles, University of North Carolina, USA

‘For anyone interested in Foucault, geography and space, this is the essential reference work. This outstanding and comprehensive collection brings together for the first time, not only original texts by Foucault, but also the work of French and Anglophone commentators and authorities in the area. An invaluable and beautifully organized resource, highly recommended for both students and scholars alike.’
Clare O’Farrell, Queensland University of Technology, Australia

‘The work of French philosopher Foucault is here excavated, translated, interpreted, assessed, and applied…This is a thoughtful and imaginative undertaking, replete with utile index .…Recommended.’
Choice

‘…it avoids the trap of “hyper-reflexivity” which would harm the quality of the work…the most enriching aspect of this volume is clearly that it identifies that Foucault’s reflections represent a veritable goldmine for geographers and anyone interested in questions of space.’
a contrario

With thanks to Variazioni foucaultiane for this news

A message from the owner of the Foucault.info site.

After 12 years with the same design, Foucault.info has been completely revamped this month:
– The code and layout has been updated to comply with new norms (HTML5) and the growing number of visitors using tablets and phone.
– With a stunning half-million pages view in 2012, the 20 texts by Foucault in the “repository” – originally collected on the net– were not always on par with academic norms. These texts are now all reread and corrected, and proper references were added. Url (addresses) are unchanged so professors and bloggers can refer to texts permanently.
– Frontpage is mirroring Clare O’Farrell’s remarkable news feed at http://foucaultnews.com
– Website has been connected to social networks, you can follow us on Facebook. August 2025 update: Page no longer exists
and Twitter https://twitter.com/FoucaultInfo Last post December 2018

It’s an honor to contribute to spreading the word of Michel Foucault – and we are looking forward to reading many engaging debates and contributions on the Foucault mailing list in 2013.

Best regards,
Camille Duchêne
Foucault-L admin

CALL FOR CHAPTERS – BOOK PROJECT

TITLE
“New Perspectives on Discourse and Governmentality”

  • Paul McIlvenny
  • Julia Zhukova Klausen
  • Laura Bang Lindegaard

at the Centre for Discourses in Transition (C-DiT), Aalborg University, Denmark

CALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS

We seek contributions for an edited book of empirical studies that illustrate new perspectives on governmentality from the point of view of discourse studies.

Studies of governmentality inspired by Foucault’s lectures and writings have slowly accumulated a body of work across a number of disciplines, including political science, policy studies, economics and history (Dean 2010, Miller & Rose 2008, Rose 1999). As a result of the recent publication in English for the first time of some of Foucault’s annual lecture series at the Collège De France from 1977-1984 (Foucault 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011), recent debates on governmentality attempt to critically rethink Foucault’s ideas, both in relation to new areas of application (e.g. climate change, health, mobility and transnationality) and in relation to developing new theories and methods appropriate to tracking the transformations in governance, self, control, power, democracy, body, conduct, space, security, environment and citizenship taking place in contemporary societies and polities across the world (Binkley & Capetillo 2009, Bröckling et al. 2011, Nadesan 2008, Walters 2012).

It is becoming apparent that the concept of governmentality has overgrown its status as a minor element of the Foucauldian heritage and has become an interdisciplinary inquiry in its own right. However, while the body of work on governmentality crosses multiple disciplinary boundaries, it is held together by a common tendency to constantly return to Foucault’s works as a sort of ‘final destination’ for those theorising the conduct of conduct. It is in response to this inclination to treat governmentality as a set of arguments, as a social and political theory which can only be understood and articulated through a re-reading of Foucault’s references to governmentality, that some scholars are proposing that a productive direction lies in viewing governmentality as a set of analytical tools rather than a theory per se, and in producing new writings of today’s governmentality rather than new readings of it (Walters 2012). This entails that studies of new territories of power and new ’technes’ of governance should be, first and foremost, empirical and analytical examinations of the ways that the rationalities and apparatus of governmentality are at work both at the level of everyday practices, rather than just institutions of governance (Lemke 2007), and through assemblages of materialities, social arrangements, discursivities and textualities, rather than through the distinct and segregated realms of the technological and ideational (Latour 2005).

Within discourse studies, there have been only a few attempts to connect up the notion of discourse and the later work of Foucault and even fewer have attempted to connect discourse and governmentality. In the broader domain of discourse studies, a number of scholars from different fields have touched upon or pointed towards the potential of Foucault’s work. Most notably, McHoul (1986, 1996) has suggested an ethnogenealogy, Laurier & Philo (2004) have proposed an ethnoarchaeology, and Iedema (2003) has done governmentality-inspired work on discourses of post-bureaucratic organisation, but others should be mentioned as well, namely Anderson (2003), Bührmann et al. (2007), Diaz-Bone et al. (2007), Fairclough (1993, 1996, 2003), Hearn (2008), Hodges (2002, 2003), Iedema & Scheeres (2003), Miller (1997), Powers (2007), Prior (1997), Ransom (1994), Salskov-Iversen et al. (2000, 2008), Tate (2007) and Wickham & Kendall (2007). However, whereas all of these studies, to varying degrees, are concerned with the relationship between the conception of discourse and Foucault’s thought, none of them in any detail discusses and demonstrates the methodological and analytical consequences of the confluence of discourse studies with studies of governmentality, and, as a consequence, there is still an important gap to be filled if discourse studies are to take full advantage of the opportunities of current and future work within studies of governmentality.

TOPICS

Contributions to the book are expected to centre on the ‘intersection’ of discourse and governmentality. Other phenomena identified with Foucault’s later work, e.g. biopolitics, securitisation, technologies of the self, etc. are also welcomed. Contributions may focus on a broad range of areas, including but not limited to health, sport and leisure, the environment, education and schooling, family, mass media, new media, international politics, transnationality, migration, non-governmental organisations, transportation, mobilities, and social movements. Further, they could engage with the following important issues:

  • Governmentalities beyond the national. For example, the discursive strategies, technologies and routines by which the conduct of an individual is increasingly governed across and beyond national territories.
  • Governmentalities outside advanced liberalism. For example, anti-politics and non-governmental politics, or studies in countries or regions in the Global South.
  • Various forms of resistance, protest or counter-conduct within current forms of advanced liberalism. This could include, for example, the Occupy-movement, protests in the Middle East, and studies of children who renegotiate the rules set up by caregivers or teachers.
  • Various forms of securitisation within current forms of advanced liberalism.
  • Relationships between different technologies (techne) and rationalities (episteme) of government (or, in other words, of regimes of practices). For example, forms of multimodal analysis of different practices and their rationalities – for instance, of the regime of automobility in everyday practices.
  • Relationships between the attempt to conduct the conduct of others and the attempt to conduct the conduct of oneself. For instance, the accomplishment of governmentalities at the intersection of politicians and citizens.
  • The role of computer-mediated technologies, communication infrastructures and digital media – for example, social media and individual/collective resistance to the attempts to regulate the actors’ conduct, or the new arts of governmentality (securitization, transnational governmentality, ethnification, etc.) that employ internet and digital technologies.

CHAPTER CONTRIBUTIONS

Given our concern with interdisciplinarity, we are looking forward to contributions that satisfy the following criteria:

  • Contributions must engage with Foucault’s work on governmentality and the studies of governmentality that have emerged in fields such as international studies, environmental studies, political science, public policy and organisation studies.
  • Contributions must have a substantial component of empirical analysis using approaches, old and new, that come under the broad umbrella of discourse studies, including critical discourse analysis, membership categorisation analysis, conversation analysis, mediated discourse analysis, nexus analysis, prefigurative discourse studies, genre analysis, social semiotics, critical applied linguistics and positive discourse analysis.
  • Contributions should engage with issues of scale and the interconnectedness of, on the one hand, the rationalities, technologies, programmes and materialities of governmentality and, on the other, the textualities, interactionalities and discursivities that circulate in practices of the conduct of conduct.
  • Contributions may present a new or invigorated perspective on governmentality or go beyond established governmentality debates.
  • Contributions may show how the conceptual innovations of intellectual thought and the subtleties of thinking about governmentality (eg. genealogy, historical ontology, powers of freedom, etc.) have an impact on the development of innovative approaches in discourse studies.
  • Potential authors are invited to submit a title and extended abstract (no more than 750 words) by April 15th 2013 to <discgov[AT]lists.hum.aau.dk>. Please also send a brief bio statement.
  • The proposals should outline their perspective on Foucault and governmentality, the methodology used, the nature and extent of the empirical data, and preliminary explanations of interests, phenomena, analytic directions, and possible value and implications (see advice above).
  • The co-editors will decide on a selection of abstracts and invite those authors to submit a full paper (8-10 000 words) for consideration to be included in the collection. The full papers will be peer reviewed and revised before submission of a draft volume to the publisher. Further revisions may be necessary in order to secure acceptance by the publisher.
  • It is planned that after submission of the full paper, authors will be invited to a seminar in Autumn 2013 dedicated to presentations, sharing data and improving the coherence and quality of the volume. Funding for the local arrangements and accommodation are being pursued.
  • Any enquires can be addressed to the co-editors at the address: <discgov[AT]lists.hum.aau.dk>.
  • Abstract (750 words): 15th April 2013
  • Full paper (8-10 000 words): 1st September 2013
  • Revised paper: 1st January 2014
  • Submission of manuscript to publisher: 1st March 2014
  • Publication date: late 2014/early 2015

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

  • Potential authors are invited to submit a title and extended abstract (no more than 750 words) by April 15th 2013 to <discgov[AT]lists.hum.aau.dk>. Please also send a brief bio statement.
  • The proposals should outline their perspective on Foucault and governmentality, the methodology used, the nature and extent of the empirical data, and preliminary explanations of interests, phenomena, analytic directions, and possible value and implications (see advice above).
  • The co-editors will decide on a selection of abstracts and invite those authors to submit a full paper (8-10 000 words) for consideration to be included in the collection. The full papers will be peer reviewed and revised before submission of a draft volume to the publisher. Further revisions may be necessary in order to secure acceptance by the publisher.
  • It is planned that after submission of the full paper, authors will be invited to a seminar in Autumn 2013 dedicated to presentations, sharing data and improving the coherence and quality of the volume. Funding for the local arrangements and accommodation are being pursued.
  • Any enquires can be addressed to the co-editors at the address: <discgov[AT]lists.hum.aau.dk>.

SCHEDULE

  • Abstract (750 words): 15th April 2013
  • Full paper (8-10 000 words): 1st September 2013
  • Revised paper: 1st January 2014
  • Submission of manuscript to publisher: 1st March 2014
  • Publication date: late 2014/early 2015

REFERENCES

Anderson, Niels Åkerstrøm (2003). Discursive Analytical Strategies: Understanding Foucault, Koselleck, Laclau, Luhmann. Bristol: The Policy Press.

Binkley, Sam & Capetillo, Jorge (Eds.) (2009). A Foucault for the 21st Century: Governmentality, Biopolitics and Discipline in the New Millennium. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press.

Bröckling, Ulrich, Krasmann, Susanne & Lemke, Thomas (Eds.) (2011). Governmentality: Current Issues and Future Challenges. Abingdon: Routledge.

Bührmann, Andrea D., Diaz-Bone, Rainer, et al. (2007). Editorial FQS 8(2): From Michel Foucault’s Theory of Discourse to Empirical Discourse Research. Forum Qualitative Social Research 8(2). [Online]. Available: <http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/&gt;.

Dean, Mitchell (2010). Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society (2nd edition). London: Sage.

Diaz-Bone, Rainer, Bührmann, Andrea D., et al. (2007). The Field of Foucaultian Discourse Analysis: Structures, Developments and Perspectives. Forum Qualitative Social Research 8(2). [Online]. Available: <http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/&gt;.

Fairclough, Norman (1993). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity press.

Fairclough, Norman (1996). Technologisation of Discourse. In Caldas-Coulthard, Carmen Rosa & Coulthard, Malcolm (Eds.), Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis, London: Routledge.

Fairclough, Norman (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge.

Foucault, Michel (2007). Security, Territory and Population (Lectures at the College De France 1977-78). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Foucault, Michel (2008). The Birth of Biopolitics (Lectures at the College De France, 1978-1979). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Foucault, Michel (2010). The Government of Self and Others (Lectures at the College De France, 1982-1983). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Foucault, Michel (2011). The Courage of Truth (The Government of Self and Others II: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1983-1984). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hearn, Mark (2008). Developing a Critical Discourse: Michel Foucault and the Cult of Solidarity. Critical Discourse Studies 5(1): 21-34.

Hodges, Ian (2002). Moving Beyond Words: Therapeutic Discourse and Ethical Problematization. Discourse Studies 4(4): 455-479.

Hodges, Ian (2003). Assembling the Soul: Self and Media Consumption in Alternative Spirituality. International Journal of Critical Psychology 8: 34-54.

Iedema, Rick (2003). Discourses of Post-Bureaucratic Organization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Iedema, Rick & Scheeres, Hermine (2003). From Doing Work to Talking Work: Renegotiating Knowing, Doing, and Identity. Applied Linguistics 24(3): 316-337.

Latour, Bruno (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Laurier, Eric & Philo, Chris (2004). Ethnoarchaeology and Undefined Investigations. Environment and Planning A 36(3): 421-436.

Lemke, Thomas (2007). An Indigestable Meal? Foucault, Governmentality and State Theory. Distinktion: Scandianvian Journal of Social Theory 15: 43-64.

McHoul, Alec (1986). The Getting of Sexuality: Foucault, Garfinkel and the Analysis of Sexual Discourse. Theory, Culture & Society 3(2): 65-79.

McHoul, Alec (1996). Semiotic Investigations: Towards an Effective Semiotics. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Miller, Gale (1997). Building Bridges: The Possibility of Analytic Dialogue Between Ethnography, Conversation Analysis and Foucault. In Silverman, David (Ed.), Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice, London: Sage.

Miller, Peter & Rose, Nikolas (2008). Governing the Present: Administering Economic, Social and Personal Life. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Nadesan, Majia Holmer (2008). Governmentality, Biopower, and Everyday Life. Abingdon: Routledge.

Powers, Penny (2007). The Philosophical Foundations of Foucaultian Discourse Analysis. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis Across Disciplines 1(2): 18-34.

Prior, Lindsay (1997). Following in Foucault’s Footsteps: Text and Context in Qualitative Research. In Silverman, David (Ed.), Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice, London: Sage.

Ransom, Janet (1994). Feminism, Difference and Discourse: The Limits of Discursive Analysis for Feminism. In Ramazanoglu, Caroline (Ed.), Up Against Foucault: Explorations of Some Tensions between Foucault and Feminism, London: Routledge.

Rose, Nikolas (1999). Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Salskov-Iversen, Dorte, Hansen, Hans Krause & Bislev, Sven (2000). Governmentality, Globalization and Local Practice: Transformations of a Hegemonic Discourse. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 25(2): 183-222.

Salskov-Iversen, Dorte, Hansen, Hans Krause & Bislev, Sven (2008). The Governmentality of Globalizing Managerial Discourses. The Case of New Public Management in Local Government Practices. In Chakrabarty, Bidyut & Bhattaccharya, Mohit (Eds.), The Governance Discourse. A Reader, New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Tate, Shirley Anne (2007). Foucault, Bakhtin, Ethnomethodology: Accounting for Hybridity in Talk-in-Interaction. Forum Qualitative Social Research 8(2). [Online]. Available: <http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/&gt;.

Walters, William (2012). Governmentality: Critical Encounters. Abingdon: Routledge.

Wickham, Gary & Kendall, Gavin (2007). Critical Discourse Analysis, Description, Explanation, Causes: Foucault’s Inspiration Versus Weber’s Perspiration. Forum Qualitative Social Research 8(2). [Online]. Available: <http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/&gt;.

Entrevue de Michel Foucault à l’Université Catholique de Louvain en 1981. Il y traite notamment de sa démarche et de sa conception du pouvoir, de la gouvernementalité.

Débat autour de Foucault (animé Par Olivier Guerrier)
et Rencontre Avec Frédéric Gros autour de son Livre Le Principe Sécurité

17 h,Jeudi 24 janvier 2013,
Librairie Ombres Blanches Toulouse
rue Gambetta
31000 Toulouse

17 h débat animé par Olivier Guerrier autour de Michel Foucault, Le statut de la vérité.

18 h : Rencontre avec Frédéric Gros autour de son livre Le principe sécurité (Gallimard). Rencontre organisée en lien avec Agrobiosciences.

Frédéric Gros est maître de conférence en philosophie à l’université Paris-XII. Il a travaillé sur l’histoire de la psychiatrie (Foucault et la folie, PUF, 1997), la philosophie de la peine (Et ce sera justice, Odile Jacob, 2001) et la pensée occidentale de la guerre (États de violence, Gallimard, 2006). Il a édité les derniers cours de Michel Foucault au Collège de France et est également l’auteur de Foucault-Wittgenstein : de possibles rencontres (Éditions Kime, 2011) et Foucault : le courage de la vérité (PUF, 2012).

« Sécurité publique », « sécurité alimentaire », « sécurité énergétique », « sécurité des frontières » : la sécurité constitue aujourd’hui dans tous les États un Principe régulateur, c’est-à-dire, confusément et tout à la fois, un sentiment, un programme politique, des forces matérielles, une source de légitimité, un bien marchand, un service public.

Ce Principe est le fruit de 4 acceptions historiques : la sécurité comme état mental, disposition des grandes sagesses stoïciennes, épicuriennes et sceptiques à atteindre la fermeté d’âme face aux vicissitudes du monde ; la sécurité comme situation objective, ordre matériel caractérisé par une absence de danger (c’est l’héritage du millénarisme chrétien) ; la sécurité comme garantie par l’État des droits fondamentaux de la conservation des biens et des personnes, voire comme bien public (surveillance, équilibre des forces, raison d’État et état d’exception) ; la sécurité comme contrôle des flux à notre époque contemporaine, avec ses concepts nouveaux : la « traçabilité », la « précaution », la « régulation ». Loin d’être des acceptions successives, ces dimensions sont des « foyers de sens », toujours à l’œuvre conjointe – la tranquillité du Sage ne dépend plus de techniques spirituelles mais d’un bon gouvernement et d’un État fort ; les ressorts millénaristes ont été recyclés par les révolutions totalitaires du 20e siècle ; la tension s’est installée entre la sécurité policière et la sécurité juridique, entre la sécurité militaire et la sécurité policière qui prétend, à son tour, combattre « l’ennemi intérieur » ; la biosécurité et ses logiques de sollicitations permanentes – être toujours et partout accessible, réactif – sont à l’opposé de l’idéal antique de la stabilité intérieure ; tandis que la sécurité du marché impose un démantèlement de l’État-providence, des politiques de santé publique et des logiques de solidarité : la sécurité-régulation se substitue à la sécurité-protection. Pour finir, le Principe Sécurité se définit toujours par une retenue au bord du désastre.

Source Fabula