Post Structuralism And The Work Of Michael Foucault

Post structuralism is a movement which originated from France in reaction to the idea of semiotics of language. Specifically, post structuralism addressed to the idea that language structure is not only a natural form that is used by individuals as a means of communication. After moving the target is to language that "damaged" to show that language can be understood, used and shaped in a number of ways without limitation. When we normalize the meaning and grammar, we are in the fact that the privileging one form of discourse on the other, which eventually and always suppress. You can see that structuralism also a postmodern, because it is against the idea of asking the normal structure and universal in the world.

In the field of communications today, most influential post structuralism is Michel Foucault. Foucault think as post structuralism normally, but, in reality, it is impossible to classify neatly. Although he denies structuralist bias in her work, looks to bridge and structural post structural tradition in the critical tradition.

Foucault argued that each - each period has a different perspective of the world, or conceptual structure, which determines the nature of knowledge in that period. Knowledge of characters in the epic Foucault called the episteme or formations which are not related to one another.

Vision from the individual - the era of exclusive and each incompatible with the vision of another era, and makes it impossible for people - people within a period to think as others think. Episteme, or way of thinking, but it is not determined by the dominant structure that is not related to one another than a day. The structure inherent in the way of practice or express ideas, and what can not be known can not be separated from the structure of discourse that is used to express whether the knowledge. For Foucault, discourse, including written text, but it also includes a written language and non verbal forms such as architecture, institutional practices, and even graphs and charts.

Discourse structure is attached to a set of rules that determine the shape and substance of the practices that are not related to one another. The use of Foucault's rules of this rule is not entirely like other theories in this book, because for him, rules are applied across cultures in various types of discourse and function at a level deeper and stronger. It is not only - the eyes set how to talk about the rules that determine the very nature of knowledge, power and ethics. Control rules can be discussed or written about who can speak or write, and who spoke seriously. Rules - rules also determine the form that must be taken.

Opposite with popular belief, according to Foucault, the person is not responsible for the forming conditions of discourse. By contrast, the discourse that determine where the person - people in the world scheme. Unrelated structure defines the human as the basis and origin science, but people - people previously never achieved the status in other periods, and will soon lose. Foucault believes that the episteme will shift again, and people will not readily apparent from the main places in the world: "This is entertaining ... and a huge source of relief to think that humans only a new discovery, the picture that did not exist at the previous two centuries, new ideas in our knowledge and which do not appear again when science have found new forms. "

This radical idea does not mean that humans do not produce discourse. In fact, they do it, but some individuals can produce a given statement, the speaker or writer simply - the eyes of fulfilling the role in making the statement. In our era, people - people believe it to obtain knowledge, and has the power, but this idea is the creation of former days - days that are not related, and expression rule which we communicate these expectations are formed. At other times, an entirely different ideas emerged from the discourse that is used.

Foucault's research on the legal system is a good example of this. He found a dramatic shift in the eighteenth century and nineteenth of torture and public punishment of the arrest and protection from a dangerous criminal. In this period, prisoners were tortured or executed in public in a big show. Formation at that time, the body is the main object of political relations. It is very natural that the powers should be pressed against the body and the punishment must involve the torture of the body.

Foucault's work centers to analyze discourse in a way that leads to the rules and structure. What he calls the first archaeological and then genealogy, this method seeks to discover, through description very heart - the heart, the regularity of the discourse. This shows the disparity or contradiction, rather than coherence, and leads to a series of one form of discourse to another. For this reason, Foucault places emphasis on comparative descriptions of more than one part of the discourse. Interpretation or the formation of the meaning of the text, can not be avoided from the analysis of this text, but this should be minimized because the interpretation does not lead to structures that do not relate to one another, and in fact, can obscure.

Foucault's writing on the subject centers of power. He believes that power is inherent part of all the formations that are interconnected. As in, the function of discourse or knowledge rather than human or institutional property. Episteme, as expressed in the language, the guarantee of power. Thus, power and knowledge are inseparable. Power, however, is a good and creative forces who found a peak in the "disciplinary authority" or explanation of the correct standards of behavior. In summary, then, the discourse in our era will shape who we are and how we think.